FAA head Bedford testifies in House Appropriations subcommittee oversight hearing

[0:01] The $12.5 billion infusion from the budget reconciliation package last year, combined [0:07] with the resources this subcommittee has provided, has kick-started something historic, [0:13] a generational rebuild of the national airspace system that has been deferred for far too long. [0:20] We know this job is not easy. We are here to be a partner in the effort, even as we exercise [0:26] our oversight responsibility, tracking progress against milestones as this multi-year effort [0:33] unfolds. Our eye is on a common goal that benefits not just the traveling public, but the economy as [0:41] a whole. If we all row in the same direction, we will build a truly modern, efficient, world-class [0:50] system. Any major multi-billion dollar effort carries a certain amount of risk. Even if we [0:57] encounter the occasional setback in executing something this transformative, I know we can [1:03] work together to right the ship. NextGen fell short, as we all know. This effort cannot fail. [1:13] I'm pleased that our Fiscal 27 Bill continues to provide the FAA with resources to modernize the [1:19] system. The facilities and equipment funding in our bill, coupled with reconciliation dollars, [1:25] is giving the agency a strong down payment to make our aviation system the gold standard of the world. [1:32] None of this works, though, without people. Hiring and retaining air traffic controllers remains one [1:37] of our greatest challenges as a nation. I know your workforce plan sets real targets, [1:44] 2,200 new controllers this fiscal year, climbing to 2,400 by Fiscal 28. I'm pleased that you met your [1:52] hiring targets last year, exceeding 2,000 new hires, but we cannot underestimate the challenge ahead in [1:59] finding the best possible controller candidates and getting them into the facilities where they are [2:04] most needed. Because of this, this committee has included resources in our bill to meet your Fiscal 27 [2:11] hiring goals and hope that fully staffed air traffic control facilities are an attainable goal [2:17] in the not-too-distant future. Controllers are only part of the equation. The technicians, the engineers, [2:25] and the specialists who install, maintain, and operate this new equipment are just as essential, [2:31] and I'd like to know how the FAA is building that technical workforce alongside the controller core. [2:38] Air traffic control is not the only piece of this puzzle. Airport infrastructure, runways, taxiways, [2:44] and the ground systems that keep aircraft moving safely is just as high a priority for members of [2:50] this subcommittee than as for the flying public. A modernized airspace system only delivers on its [2:57] promise if the airports it serves can keep pace. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the [3:03] infrastructure needs along with the technology upgrades already underway. Again, I want to thank you, [3:09] Administrator Bedford, for being here and for the work you do and the work your team does every day to [3:14] keep the traveling public safe. This is a big undertaking. I'm confident that with good faith and hard work on [3:21] both sides we'll get this right for the American people. That concludes my formal remarks. I now [3:28] recognize the ranking member Mr. Clyburn for his opening comments. Well thank you very much, [3:34] Mr. Chairman, and welcome Administrator Bedford. I want to thank you for joining us today to examine how [3:41] the FAA is advancing aviation safety. I appreciate your recent visit with me and our discussion on some of [3:49] the technologies that can increase safety and efficiency in the national airspace system. Earlier [3:56] this year we discussed some of the administration's proposals to modernize the air traffic control system [4:03] with Secretary Duffy. And while modernization is a priority for both sides of the aisle, I am personally [4:10] concerned that staffing retention and air traffic controller pay continues to play out in the public. [4:18] While your focus seems to be primarily on technology upgrades, system upgrades are certainly needed. [4:26] However, modern technology cannot, and I might add should not, replace the FAA workers needed to safely [4:36] operate within the modernization environment. I understand the FAA is forcing ahead with 12.5 billion dollars [4:45] provided in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill. But the administration has not yet laid out a detailed [4:51] plan or submitted a funding request to explain how you would sustain, let alone finish, of the effort. I [5:01] expect to learn more from you today about how the FAA is managing its resources and to discuss more in detail [5:10] that its plan. The committee provided 96 million dollars in the fiscal year 2026 bill to support the FAA's request to hire up to 2,500 new air traffic controllers. [5:29] You have now reduced the 2027 target to hire only 2,300 ATCs and a new ATC workforce plan changes hours and expectations for controllers. [5:45] I remain concerned that these targets do not take into account challenges with academy success rates, burnouts, [5:56] and retention issues, and early retirements among our existing controller workforce. These challenges are [6:05] not new, but decisions on how to solve them cannot be made without the air traffic controllers workforce [6:14] and their union. The FAA's 2027 budget requests to fully fund facilities and equipment at its authorized level [6:25] for FAA's Asian facilities and technologies, which I support. But we still do not have clarity on which systems are potentially being replaced [6:40] with the modernization effort or how the FAA workforce will be trained on new technologies. [6:48] Meanwhile, American businesses, including manufacturers and suppliers, face uncertainty and increased costs [6:58] as they are left in the dark. With the constant shifts in tariffs, America is losing the confidence [7:07] of our partners to deliver and improve air traffic control system and cost-effective aviation manufacturing. [7:18] Tens of thousands of jobs across the high-skilled manufacturing and engineering fields depend on the ability [7:27] of U.S. aircraft manufacturers and suppliers to access global markets on fair and reliable terms. [7:36] This is especially true for manufacturing in my own district and home state of South Carolina. [7:45] Our aviation supply chain system requires certainty from our global partners and the trust that we can deliver [7:55] the state-of-the-art transportation at our airports. This includes the modernization work already underway. [8:05] Supply chain issues cannot continue to impede on reaching our safety goals and global competitiveness. [8:17] Mr. Chairman, it is our duty on this subcommittee to continue to help the FAA keep our skies safe. [8:26] I look forward to working together to support robust investments in FAA technologies and just as [8:34] importantly in its staff and the workforce pipeline. I look forward to learning more about how we can all [8:42] work together to support the advancement of FAA. And thank you for being here today, Mr. Bedford. [8:50] I look forward to hearing your testimony. [8:52] Thank you, Mr. Kleiber. [8:54] The chair now recognizes the full committee chairman. The gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Kohl. [8:59] Thank you very much, Chairman Womack. And thank you, Ranking Member Clyburn. [9:03] Welcome, Administrator Bedford. It is genuinely a delight to see you again. And we appreciate you being [9:10] here and are grateful for your continued leadership at the FAA. This is a genuinely excellent committee. I don't [9:19] think we have any bad subcommittees, quite frankly, on the Appropriations Committee. But there's no [9:24] question under Chairman Womack and Ranking Member Clyburn. And just look at the members here. I mean, [9:31] these are really serious members, quite frankly. And they do a good job. And at the end of the day, [9:36] they generally find a bipartisan way to get things done. So you're going to find a committee that's [9:41] engaged and wants to be helpful to you while obviously advancing the priorities of Congress. [9:48] Whether at the gate or on the flight deck, in the skies above, or just landed, your mission is clear, [9:53] Mr. Administrator. Safety, security, and efficiency. Congress is here to reinforce those key pillars and [10:00] provide the investment and oversight necessary to ensure the FAA has the resources, workforce, [10:06] and capabilities to carry them out. When we discussed safeguarding our national airspace, [10:11] supporting U.S. aviation manufacturing, overseeing drones, and advancing emerging technologies, [10:18] I'm proud to say that this subcommittee does more than just talk about these priorities. We fund them, [10:23] we oversee them, and we work to ensure America continues to lead the world in aviation. Earlier this [10:30] summer, the House Appropriations Committee completed its work on the fiscal year [10:34] 2027 Transportation Housing and Urban Development Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. [10:40] A strong measure, led by Subcommittee Chairman Womack, makes critical investments in the infrastructure, [10:45] workforce, and innovation that keep Americans and our aviation system moving. I was proud to support [10:52] its advancement and the work done to ensure all 12 of our FY27 appropriations bills were reported out [10:59] of committee. Unfortunately, we're still waiting on the Senate to move their bills so we can go to [11:04] conference and finish the job. I have no doubt that that will be a negotiated product coming out of [11:09] that committee and I think it will be stronger for the fact that we reach at some point a bipartisan [11:15] agreement. But we do need our friends in the Senate to actually do their work so we can go to conference [11:21] and begin that negotiation. The men and women who depend on a safe modern aviation system should not be [11:27] delayed because of partisan delay on the other side of the rotunda. Administrator Bedford, I don't need to tell [11:34] you how important aviation is to Oklahoma. We're home of Tinker Air Force Base, Vance Air Force Base, [11:40] and Altus Air Force Base, anchoring military aviation in our state. Notably, Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma [11:47] City is home to the largest military depot in the world. And just up the road in Tulsa, the American [11:54] Airlines-based maintenance facility represents the largest civil air depot in America. The presence and [12:01] footprint of these major installations reinforces our strong commercial aviation presence and thriving [12:08] general aviation community. And obviously, under your supervision, Mike Monroney is one of the premier [12:13] facilities in the federal government for ensuring aviation safety, for training our air traffic [12:19] controllers, and frankly, for doing groundbreaking research on the future of aviation. We're increasingly a [12:25] hub for innovation that will define the next generation of flight, including unmanned aircraft flight. [12:32] I was glad to see FAA and DOT break ground on the vertical takeoff and landing range this summer at Mike [12:39] Monroney Aeronautical Air Center. This dedicated vertiport will let the FAA and industry partners test and [12:46] develop procedures for advanced air mobility aircraft. I also want to recognize FAA's continued partnership with [12:54] the Choctaw Nation. Their work under FAA's unmanned aircraft systems pilot programs has made Oklahoma a [13:01] national leader in safely integrating drones into our airspace. I believe Oklahoma is well positioned to [13:08] help land on advanced air mobility as that industry mature, lead, excuse me, on advanced air mobility as that [13:16] industry matures. As this subcommittee continues to push for full year funding for the FAA [13:22] and the rest of the Department of Transportation, safety remains our number one priority. Every decision we make [13:29] on this bill is measured against that standard. So I look forward to your testimony today, Mr. Administrator, [13:36] and I look forward to working with you and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get a final bill across the [13:41] finish line before the end of the calendar year. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. [13:46] Thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, the full committee chairman. Administrator Bedford, the floor is yours. [13:53] We know that you have some prepared remarks. Your full written testimony will be included as part of the [13:59] record, and I'm going to yield the floor to you for five minutes so you can summarize for the benefit of [14:04] our subcommittee. You're recognized. Well, thank you, Chairman Womack, and good morning, [14:08] ranking member Clyburn and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the [14:13] administration's $22.4 billion fiscal 2027 budget request for the Federal Aviation Administration. [14:21] But first, I'd just like to take a moment. I realize the families from Flight 5342 are gathering [14:26] later this morning. I just want to make sure that they understand that that's why we're here. [14:30] We're here to make sure that we're doing the hard work that's necessary to prevent an accident like [14:34] that from ever happening again. So I just want to remember those that were lost and let them know [14:38] that they're in our thoughts and our prayers. The core mission, as you point out, Mr. Chairman, [14:43] is to provide the safest and most efficient aerospace system in the world. That was the standard from the [14:49] beginning. It remains the standard today. To meet today's demands and prepare the skies for tomorrow, [14:55] we are focused on executing a rapid modernization of the national aerospace system, hiring and training the [15:02] best people and embedding predictive safety analytics into everything that we do. Demand [15:08] on our airspace is skyrocketing. Commercial flight volumes are forecast conservatively to grow by more [15:14] than 40 percent through 20 20 2046. And alongside that, we'll see rapid expansions in commercial space [15:22] launches, drone operations and electric aircraft mobility. Yet our system today has remained reliant on [15:30] obsolescent decade old technology, causing otherwise unavoidable delays and cancellations. Thanks to the [15:38] leadership of President Trump, Secretary Duffy and this Congress, you passed a historic 12.5 billion [15:45] down payment through the Working Families Tax Cut Act. And with that, we are executing on the most ambitious [15:52] modernization project of our time and delivering it in record time. Over the past year, we've replaced over 64 [16:00] percent of our legacy copper telecommunications network. We've converted over 402 radio sites, [16:07] transitioned 22 of our air traffic control towers from paper flight strips to electronic data stations. [16:16] We've advanced surface movement radars at five major airports. We've deployed over 100 surface awareness [16:22] systems nationwide. I want to recognize and thank our air modernization office for their amazing progress and [16:30] continue to encourage their steady focus as we prepare for even greater deployments in fiscal 2027. [16:36] Our fiscal 2027 requests supplements that initial twelve and a half billion down payment with an [16:44] additional 1.5 billion from our annual F&E budget for vital safety improvements to air traffic control [16:50] infrastructure. These funds will allow us to address important programs like our data communication [16:55] modernization efforts, as well as funding to start the critical work of upgrading our automation systems, [17:03] which will revolutionize how we can safely manage the growing air traffic demands for our country. [17:08] The brand new air traffic control system is one of the most ambitious and critical infrastructure [17:13] projects of our time, but updating obsolete and unsustainable infrastructure is only part of the [17:20] modernization initiative. To ensure a resilient, efficient, scalable, and future ready national airspace [17:27] system, we also must modernize the traffic flow management systems, strategic planning tools, and [17:34] deploy common automations with cyber secure networks that tie it all together. We will accomplish this with [17:41] four major foundational upgrades that will revolutionize how we provide air traffic services in the future. [17:47] We will deploy commercially available technologies customized for the complex requirements of the [17:53] largest and most challenging aviation ecosystem in the world. These upgrades will build upon one [17:59] another to reduce and minimize delays and cancellations, importantly reduce controller workloads, [18:07] and more importantly get the flying public to their final destinations safely and reliably. Our people are our [18:14] greatest asset, air traffic controllers, technicians, safety inspectors. They're on the front lines every day [18:21] working together to ensure that tens of thousands of flights that we manage arrive safely to their destinations. [18:28] Rest assured we are addressing long-standing controller and other safety critical workforce shortages. [18:34] Currently we have over 11,000 fully certified controllers deployed in our 313 federal facilities, with another 4,000 [18:44] developmental controllers in the facility training pipeline, including 900 controllers who were already fully [18:51] certified but are now recertifying in the facility that they've relocated to. After meeting our fiscal 2025 [18:59] hiring target of 2,000, we have also exceeded our 2026 hiring goal of 2,200 additional trainees, and as you [19:08] point out our fiscal 27 budget request includes an additional 95 million dollars to hire and train 2,300 [19:15] additional controllers. Hiring is critical, but it's also important that we develop and deploy modern [19:23] automated scheduling tools to improve our staffing efficiencies and reduce the needs for chronic overtime [19:29] usage. Increased staffing, lower overtime requirements, and providing our controllers with better work-life [19:35] schedules. Oh and also importantly investing in the quality of their equipment and the facilities that [19:41] we require them to work in. These are the factors that will significantly improve our controller's quality [19:46] of life. Earlier this year the FAA completed an agency-wide realignment to break down silos, enhance [19:54] operational excellence, and increase transparency and accountability. Central to this strategy was the [20:00] creation of an Office of Aviation Safety Management. This office unifies safety oversight intelligence and [20:07] risk analysis that were previously spread across many separate FAA business units. We are coordinating [20:14] holistic risk management strategy at the agency level now, eliminating those data silos and ensuring [20:20] real-time access to agency-wide safety information and risk planning. This strengthens the agency's [20:27] ability to proactively identify emerging safety trends and implement data-driven solutions. What used to take the [20:35] FAA analysts months now can be done in near real time with significantly greater accuracy. However, there's still much [20:42] to be accomplished. The administration's fiscal 2027 budget request continues to bolster our ability to use [20:49] comprehensive data integration strategies to manage skies safely. In closing, I want to thank the 44,000 dedicated public [20:58] servants at the FAA for their continued hard work and to Congress and the subcommittee for its continued [21:05] bipartisan support. That initial $12.5 billion investment, yes, it's allowing us to build a solid [21:12] foundation. The 2027 budget request now allows us to begin necessary follow-on funding to finish phase one. [21:20] But let me be clear, if we halt the momentum now and don't accomplish the task associated with phase two of [21:27] modernization, once again we will see the system slip into higher delays, higher cancellations, and a less [21:33] resilient airspace. So I implore you, let's work together to finish building the modern air traffic [21:38] control system the American traveling public expects and deserves. I thank you for your support and I [21:45] really look forward to our conversation this morning. Thank you. Thank you, Administrator Bedford. [21:49] We will now begin our question and answer period. We will stick to the five-minute rule. So I would remind [21:59] all of our members to confine your time within that five-minute period. We'll recognize in the order of [22:07] seniority based on who was seated at the time that the subcommittee was gaveled in, and I will recognize [22:14] myself to begin this period. Administrator Bedford, last year's budget reconciliation package, as we have [22:19] all understood, had $12.5 billion, a down payment, as we call it, for air traffic control modernization, [22:27] funding two of its major efforts that are now underway, telecommunications upgrades and the radar [22:32] replacement program. Now as of late August, our information says that 63 percent of the targeted [22:41] legacy copper connections have been replaced with fiber, 5G, low earth orbit connectivity. And then [22:48] on the radar side, procurement, early deployment work is now underway. And I recognize this represents [22:54] real progress. I want to make sure we're getting full value for the taxpayer dollars already obligated. [22:59] So when do you expect the copper to fiber and wireless transition to be fully complete? [23:03] And is that timeline still on track? Yes, Mr. Chairman, that timeline is not only on track, [23:10] it's actually coming in to the left a little bit on our schedule. The original plan was to complete [23:14] that work by December of 2027. The line of sight that we have through our integrated master schedule [23:20] now looks at more September of 2027. Okay. Turning to radar, 3 billion of that 12 and a half [23:28] was going to replacing up to 612 radars by June of 28. Can you give us a quick update on where that stands? [23:35] Are we having any supply chain problems along the way? And are we still on pace for the 28 deadline? [23:43] Well, there is a little bit of bad news there. There are supply chain issues that we are wrestling [23:48] with and import issues and tariffs, quite frankly. So there are issues there that have slowed us down. [23:54] We would have actually been a little faster in our progress reporting in this quarter, except we've had [23:59] two units damaged in transit. So that's slowing us down. If I'm being perfectly honest with you, [24:05] I think we should assume that the schedule will slip from June to September of 2028. I hope we can [24:10] recover that and bring it back in. But we are encountering some challenges there. How are you [24:16] sequencing the prioritized work of this modernization program? So I don't know if you guys had a chance to [24:24] parse through the GAO report. Actually, it's a wonderful document. So I would encourage everybody [24:30] on the committee to thoroughly read it. We have a couple of issues we don't necessarily concur with, [24:36] but we do have an advanced integrated master schedule that actually is now being run through [24:41] Paraton's agentic AI systems. And so we now can actually look at how we might change things around [24:49] to see whether or not, in real time, that will pull the schedule closer or farther away. So it's kind [24:54] of like going to your optometrist. You know, we can keep flipping the switches and see whether or not [24:58] we get a better or a worse result. So again, with the advent of the agentic AI systems that we're using [25:05] now, this is why I can come and tell you some of the slipping that we're seeing on radars looks like [25:09] it may put pressure on delivering that schedule. But we're talking weeks or months, not years. [25:16] And yes, we will continue to look for ways to supplement our deployment to bring that back on time. [25:22] I want to talk money for just a minute. If Congress does not enact another reconciliation package [25:31] or supplemental for the modernization program we're talking about, it will be up to the facilities and [25:37] equipment account to carry both the ongoing system modernization and legacy sustainment, [25:44] which is going to be essential. We can't have a gap, as it were. Now, we provided $4 billion, [25:51] as requested by the president for F&E in this bill. I think we had a kind of a standard of about $3 billion [25:58] over time. But, you know, we've ratcheted that amount up. That may be woefully insufficient to meet [26:05] the resource needs to complete the program. So give me your thoughts on the resourcing requirements and [26:13] whether or not F&E can handle it. [26:17] Let me be clear, it can't. I mean, so I think one of the more underappreciated elements of the [26:24] modernization project is we have to build a brand new system right next to the existing obsolete system. [26:31] Because with over 18 million flight trajectories a year, nearly a billion Americans traveling every year, [26:36] we can't allow the current system to have any downtime. So we literally have to build the brand [26:43] new air traffic control system right next to the other and then methodically shift over from old to [26:50] new. And I can certainly walk you through that. But we're sitting here today with a knowledge that if [26:55] we stop now just building the infrastructure project itself and fixing the people even, two of the three [27:01] pillars of modernization. Got to get the people right. Got to get the foundation of the infrastructure [27:06] right. But the third issue is bringing the technologies that will revolutionize how we can [27:11] move traffic and grow capacity in this country. That's another 10 billion dollar investment. [27:17] I know I'm about out of town. I just want to ask you real quickly, of that 4 billion in F&E, [27:22] assuming we get a bill passed, Mr. Chairman. [27:28] I've done my part. [27:29] I know you have. Of that 4 billion, can you give me a percentage of what is going to legacy versus [27:39] what's going to modernization? Out of the 4 billion dollars, we are earmarking 1.5 billion to go to [27:46] modernization, which will allow us to continue doing the work right now on both the the federal [27:52] enterprise network system. That's the new data architecture that we need to ultimately get into [27:56] the cloud, cyber secure, data capacity that we need to manage the now. So 1.5 billion for that and to [28:03] move the common automation platform forward. [28:05] Thank you. Mr. Clyburn. [28:08] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to change the focus here a little bit. You close on [28:12] mentioning safety, so I want to open my question in there. In response to the tragic collision of [28:23] American Eagle Flight 5342 and the military aircraft of DCA, I believe the Senate Commerce Committee in May, [28:35] you told them that you had implemented 19 of the 33 recommendations directed to FAA. There were 50 overall, [28:52] 33 to FAA. Now the NTSB has now reviewed your responses and as of yesterday deemed 11 of your [29:10] actions to be unacceptable, which may be not that unusual. However, it's my understanding that you [29:24] sent a letter to NTSB on yesterday stating that you believe the FAA has effectively addressed several of [29:34] the recommendations, including five that were deemed unacceptable. Now do you intend to still work with [29:43] NTSB to incorporate their safety recommendations into your actions? Well, let me just clarify the 35, [29:51] they actually last night said 10 of them were unacceptable. So I don't want to undersell it. [29:56] So we have 10 items still out of the 35 recommendations that we are not eye to eye on. And yes, [30:01] we will continue to work with the NTSB to find a resolution to those 10 issues. Are you saying rather than [30:06] five, you have 10? I'm saying that the NTSB had 35 unique findings that they asked the FAA to address. [30:15] Right. As we sit here today, we've addressed to their reasonable satisfaction 25 of the 35, [30:21] and we have 10 that we have not. But do you still work on those 10? We're having, [30:27] I think clearly we got a letter from them on the 10 and now we need to dig deeper and find out what [30:32] exactly about our solution they didn't like. And how are we going to bridge that gap? Yes. So we will [30:38] continue to have engagement with the NTSB. Well, I appreciate modernization, but I think all of us [30:46] appreciate more safety issues when it comes to this. We'll have to do both. Now, the GAO reported, [30:58] uh, yeah, issued a polling yesterday, uh, that can, uh, my, um, problems with, uh, or issues. I shouldn't [31:07] say problems, but issues with modernization. According to this report, uh, the FAA has not developed a [31:14] detailed plan with complete cost estimates to finish this ambitious effort. And the estimates, uh, the FAA [31:23] has provided do not include government release costs or any post implementation operations and [31:31] maintenance costs. Now, I do not question modernization. I'm all, uh, for being modern, [31:36] but at this point, will the FAA develop a complete plan and present this committee, uh, with a fulsome [31:45] look, uh, at the true cost of doing this job correctly? Well, first, just to correct the record, [31:53] I want to thank the GAO. We asked them to come in and start this process. So we want transparency. We [31:59] want accountability. So I am grateful that they came in early on this process and [32:03] started this effort. Again, there's tremendously useful information in their report on just the [32:09] magnitude of the problems, the challenges that we face in modernization. And again, I think it's [32:15] instructive reading for every member on the subcommittee to go through this report. I've gone [32:19] through it in great detail. And while I do not concur with the two findings that they made, we do have [32:25] life cycle cost estimates for the entirety of the project. And then we do have a highly integrated master [32:31] work schedule, which I referenced earlier. So, uh, perhaps we need to get them back in and go [32:36] through this one more time, but focusing on the stuff in terms of the dollars, uh, you'll remember, [32:42] I think I wasn't here. So I'm going by what I've been told when we first brought phase one of [32:47] modernization, we were asking for 15 or $16 billion. And that got cut back to 12 and a half billion in the [32:55] working family tax cut act. Guess what? It's costing $16 billion to do phase one. And we're funding that [33:02] gap out of F and E. So I actually think the original cost estimates that we brought Congress were pretty [33:08] darn accurate. We just didn't get the funding that requested. And so, yes, the both are true. We are [33:15] going to overspend the 12 and a half billion to get phase one of modernization done. It's not true that [33:20] we didn't have a, uh, correct estimate of what we thought that initial cost would be. Does that make [33:25] sense? Well, again, I'm new to this too. So, um, but we do have a fantastic plan. We're going to run [33:34] over 11,000 modern modernization undertakings over the next two and a half years. So, uh, the agency is [33:41] working its tail off to get this done and get it done right. The other thing that this, this report [33:45] shows in great detail is the FAA has been at this since 1995 for over 30 years. And we spent [33:51] over the report says $36 billion on failed modernization efforts. So Chairman Womack, [33:57] you're right. We've got to get this right. And I think we can do that with strong bipartisan effort. [34:02] And I welcome each of you, your staff, your teams over to the FAA to the modernization office, [34:08] and you can see in real time what we're doing. So open book. Thank you. Mr. Cole. Thank you, [34:14] Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Betford, uh, your controller hiring targets are climbing toward 2300 and beyond, [34:21] and every one of those trainees, as you know, has to pass through the academy in Oklahoma City. [34:26] It's the gateway. And we want to make sure it's not a constraint on you reaching the, uh, targets [34:32] that, uh, you've laid out in terms of staffing. So is the Monroney Center appropriately resourced, [34:38] that is classroom space, instructors, equipment, uh, so that we don't hit a choke point surging, [34:45] uh, uh, training for both controllers and technicians? Uh, well, thank you for the question, [34:50] uh, uh, Chairman Cole. Um, first, the Mike Moroney Center is a fabulous asset for the FAA, [34:56] as you mentioned in your testimony or your opening comments. So we do more there than just [35:01] train controllers. It is our logistics hub. Um, and while sometimes I can be critical, you know, [35:08] there's a lot of things I look at that we do at the FAA that we don't do particularly well, [35:12] that we can do better. Uh, but when I, one of the shining stars is our logistics team at the Mike [35:18] Moroney Center. They've been doing theory of constraints for over a decade and, and it explains [35:22] something to me. I think it's important for the committee to understand because it affects our [35:26] budget that $4 billion for sustainment. It's actually also to replace legacy infrastructure, [35:33] but we haven't been able to afford to do that because the cost of the old legacy system is so [35:39] extreme. We're spending the majority of our budget keeping the lights turned on that technology. [35:45] So obsolete, I don't even know how we, how we do it, but the guys at the logistics center at Mike [35:50] Moroney have figured it out. So those guys are fantastic. Classroom-wise, uh, we're full, [35:56] you know, so we can't put any more controllers into training than what we have now. However, [36:00] through Secretary Duffy's leadership, the FAA has, um, created 13 new, uh, certified training [36:06] programs with local universities and colleges, and those are creating new feeder streams for [36:11] controllers that we can feed into our local facilities. [36:13] Well, again, you, you sort of touched on this, but I'm going to ask it made a little bit different [36:19] way, but are you comfortable? You have the resources to actually modernizing the training [36:25] center itself. As you said, it's old, it's got lots of problems. They do a great job running what [36:30] they've got, but at some point it, it needs to change. And again, I know we've put a lot on your [36:35] plate, but, uh, having some idea in terms of long-term infrastructure, what you need would be very [36:41] helpful and how are we measuring up and helping you in that regard? [36:44] Well, I, I do think there is a lot of opportunity for improvement. Uh, if I'm being fully transparent, [36:52] we have not looked at the curriculum for how we train a controller in over 30 years. And so while [36:57] we're bringing in new technologies, unfortunately, we're training them to do an old way of business. [37:03] And some of the things that we train them on, for example, we spend nine curriculum days [37:07] training controllers how to do math to separate traffic when radar goes out. But the procedure is [37:13] when the radar goes out, we simply move the traffic elsewhere, you know? So there is no control, [37:18] active controlling going on using math and controllers and slide rules. So there's nine [37:23] days of wasted curriculum in my mind. So there's an awful lot of opportunity, I think, to improve [37:29] the delivery of training and the curriculum enrichment that we're providing our controllers to make them [37:34] more field ready to go out and do their on your job training in their facilities. [37:39] As you know, there's a considerable controversy sometimes around not only how we train controllers, [37:46] but should we focus so much in one place? I mean, obviously I'm parochial in Oklahoma, [37:51] we think that's the right way to do it. So there's a common experience amongst the controllers themselves, [37:56] a common set of instructors, curricula, what have you. [37:59] What is your thinking on that? And are you comfortable with that approach generating, [38:07] again, ultimately the number of controllers that you need? [38:10] Well, so in my prior life, you may have heard we've had pilot shortages. So in the pilot shortage [38:18] world, we stopped relying on traditional feeder systems for us, which were colleges and universities, [38:24] and we created our own vertical. We created the largest privately owned pilot university in the country. [38:30] So we wanted to be self-sufficient. So I think Mike Maroney is similar to that, [38:35] but we don't rely just on one training facility. So we build a core that we keep busy because it's [38:41] highly efficient, and then we supplement with feeder streams from other, these collegiate training [38:47] programs. So I think Mike Maroney is critical to have an efficient training facility, but it shouldn't [38:52] be the only training facility. We should continue to supplement with resources. [38:55] There's a big difference between supplementing and duplicating, [39:01] you know, and I think that's the core of the issue from our standpoint here. I'm just being [39:06] candid with you. If we're stretched to have the dollars to do what we're doing now, and we are, [39:12] I don't think, you know, duplicating that facility someplace else, and we hear that idea in the Senate [39:18] quite a bit, makes much sense in terms of the resources we have. So again, I'm sort of out of [39:26] time and running over. We can have that discussion another time, but again, that's an important [39:32] consideration for us. So with that, Mr. Chairman, I'll yield back, but thank you again. And thanks [39:37] again for coming out and spending the amount of time that you spent there. It's been a lot to our [39:41] delegation. I know Representative Vice was there and just having somebody, your administrative team [39:47] on the ground was a huge asset to us and a big morale boost, quite frankly, to the people at the [39:53] facility. So thank you. Well, it was enlightening for me too, sir. So thank you for inviting me. [39:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If it pleases subcommittee, I'd like to modify the order of appearance here on the [40:04] Q&A to recognize Mr. Strong, who's got another commitment, uh, during this hour. And I told him [40:12] that I thought we could recognize him a little bit sooner. So Mike, if you don't mind just holding [40:17] fire for just a minute. So with that, as long as you give me 10 minutes. Thank you. So without [40:22] objection, Mr. Strong, you're recognized for five minutes. Thank you for the committee. I appreciate [40:26] your consideration. Thank you, Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Clyburn for convening this hearing today. [40:31] Administrator Bedford, thank you for being here. My district in North Alabama is home to the port of [40:36] Huntsville, a unique multimodal complex that includes Huntsville International Airport. [40:41] The Huntsville Airport integrates air, cargo, rail, highway connectivity to support critical supply chain [40:49] for our national security and economic growth and is the only FAA licensed commercial space entry site [40:56] in the United States. Administrator Bedford, multimodal ports strengthen our domestic supply [41:02] chain and provide more reliable and efficient movement of critical goods and materials across [41:07] our country. When the FAA evaluates infrastructure needs at an airport like Huntsville International, [41:13] how does it account for its broader role as a part of a multimodal freight network, uh, supporting our [41:20] defense industrial base and critical domestic supply chains? Uh, thank you for the question, sir. The, [41:27] the, it's actually a fairly laborious process. We're looking for airspace complexity. We're looking for [41:33] the amount of demand, uh, that's on the system. We're looking for other ancillary effects, uh, you know, [41:39] determine whether the infrastructure is appropriately sized for the, the market requirements. Thank you. [41:45] Building on that, Huntsville International Airport has consistently been recognized as one of the top small [41:50] airports in the country, serving a fast growing region with over 1.47 million pastures annually, [41:57] and has the second longest runway in the southeast United States. Administrator Bedford, how is the FAA [42:02] ensuring small and mid-sized airports have the resources they need to keep pace with rapid growth and [42:09] increasing demand? Uh, well, again, through the, the, uh, AIP programs and AIG programs, we have a, [42:17] essentially through the budgeting process, a pot of money that we are allocating to small and medium [42:22] size. Otherwise larger airports, frankly, would just crowd them out in terms of their demand. So [42:27] I think there's a very, um, considerate look to make sure that we're supporting our small and medium [42:33] sized airports, uh, and keeping them healthy. Uh, of course you can do more with more. Uh, so there's, uh, [42:41] there's a lot of demand on those infrastructure dollars and not enough of them to go around. [42:46] Thank you. Does the FAA current, uh, does its current funding criteria adequately account for [42:52] growth when determining where resources are allocated? I'm, I'm not going to say we can't [42:57] do a better job because I think there are, you know, we should always be striving to look for [43:01] better ways to use data. Uh, we do have very good, uh, information in terms of current demand and [43:08] one year out demand. We don't have great insight into demand much farther down the road. Thank you. [43:14] Airports need certainty in the federal approval process to plan and deliver major, uh, capital [43:20] improvements, but I've heard concerns that federal reviews can sometimes take longer than the [43:25] construction itself. What is the FAA doing to improve its review and approval process and eliminate [43:32] unnecessary delays in airport infrastructure products or projects? Yeah. So, uh, uh, of course, [43:38] NEPA and other environmental reviews are a popular topic. Um, we're concerned about them as well. We're [43:44] concerned about the time that it takes to do anything in the national aviation system. No matter [43:50] where we fly, there's somebody beneath those airplanes and that, that those airplanes, unfortunately, [43:56] even though they create less noise today than they did 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, [44:01] they're not noise free. And so as we try to increase capacity and drive more efficiency, [44:07] meaning the, meaning the constraint is the runway. It shouldn't be the airspace. We can create greater [44:12] efficiency, but as we do that, we're moving noise around and that obviously creates challenges for us [44:17] in terms of the timeline that it takes to affect those changes. Thank you. The Department of Transportation [44:23] said it expects FAA license launches and re-entries to reach 10,000 annually by 2035. Uh, I commend the [44:32] administration's focus on strengthening Americans, uh, leadership in commercial space and ensuring our [44:38] regulatory and transportation infrastructure keeps pace with the industry's rapid growth. The FY 2027 THUD [44:45] appropriations bill provides additional funding and hiring authority to accommodate increased commercial [44:52] space operations. Given the increased, uh, support and engagement from both Congress and the [44:58] President, can you speak to the current average time to process a launch or re-entry license and how the new [45:05] DOT Space Task Force will play a role in breaking down regulatory and operational barriers facing the commercial [45:13] space industry? Well, if I'm being perfectly honest, sir, we're behind. Uh, we should have been hiring [45:19] five years ago in order to fill these positions to manage the tempo and cadence of the launch request [45:25] that we're seeing today. Uh, so I would say while it's moving at about 2x the speed it was moving two [45:32] years ago, it's still probably too slow for SpaceX and Blue Origin and companies like that. I don't know [45:37] that we'll ever be, unless we get same-day service, I don't know that we'll ever be as fast as they want [45:42] us to be, but the overarching issue is maintaining safety. I mean, we need to understand where these [45:48] missions are going and how they're coming back, uh, and keep American public safe. Thank you. Mr. [45:53] Chairman, I yield back and thank you for your patience. You bet. Thank you. Mr. Quigley. Thank [45:58] you, Mr. Chairman. Administrator, thank you for being here. Uh, as the co-chair of Quiet Skies Caucus [46:06] and the fact that O'Hare is in my district, uh, well aware that aircraft noise isn't just a nuisance. [46:14] Uh, as you know, uh, study after study is now showing that it actually has a physiological harm [46:21] to people, particularly senior citizens. It's one of the reasons when we did FAA reauthorization in 2020 [46:28] form, we created the Aircraft Noise Advisory Committee. Uh, we are almost two years since [46:37] we did that two years past the deadline, which we were supposed to stand that up. Uh, so my recent [46:43] letter to you, there was a response, but it still didn't have a timeline. Uh, so we're other than [46:52] we're getting to it. So we have, we have closed the committee. Uh, we respond, we closed the committee [46:58] application process on August 10th, and we are reviewing with the Department of Transportation [47:02] committee members. So I do think we're going to have a resolution on that very quickly. [47:06] Uh, and for years we have looked at what level of noise is acceptable, right? There is a standard [47:14] that, that best could be described as what was arbitrary. Uh, and I was concerned that we created [47:20] that in the sense that we didn't want to create a standard based on science and health that we [47:27] couldn't meet. But it still matters that, that we know what that risk is. Uh, have you had a chance yet [47:36] to start to look at that in terms of what are acceptable levels of noise over an extended period [47:42] of time? Because as you know, it's an average. Uh, no sir, I have not. I'm not going to tell you [47:47] that otherwise I have not looked at the noise, uh, levels. So this is me officially asking you to, [47:53] to do that because the two are obviously related. Uh, back to O'Hare, uh, being in my district, [48:00] it's more than that. It's still now and again, the busiest airport in the country. Um, and that's [48:09] important, not just because it's important to Chicago, but it's such a vital part of our aviation [48:15] system. And if it's not working well, the whole system suffers, which is why it should have at least [48:21] some priority in terms of, as we address this staffing issues, it is, uh, 65% staffed. And as you [48:30] know, we've got people working overtime for years that are getting burned out. And I understand [48:35] they're offering bonuses and trying to get people, it's still sort of just shifting the blank, the, [48:40] the burden across the country. But we built this, we have a runway we hardly ever use, which would help [48:46] because there isn't sufficient staffing at that particular tower. I'm asking all this is preface to [48:53] the fact that part of the way we tried to address that staffing issue was a 3.8% pay increase. [49:01] They're getting one. This can't supercharge the, the, the plan to dramatically increase. It has to, [49:10] and I would see a discourage. It would have to me for someone who wants to do this or someone who's [49:15] currently do this. It's sort of showing a lack of concern about the stress that they're under [49:22] financial and otherwise. Why hasn't this happened yet? Why haven't we given our controllers this pay [49:28] raise that we voted for? Well, I think you had four questions in there. So let me try to pick [49:33] those up. That last one's probably the most important one. Well, they'll go hand in glove. [49:38] The architecture of the Chicago O'Hare Airport requires us to staff three towers during peak [49:43] periods of operations. So in the budget supplemental that we've been discussing, how can we build one [49:49] tower to replace three, which would significantly improve our staffing resources. The systems that we [49:55] operate in Chicago aren't interoperable from one tower to another. They're designed to have a single [50:01] tower. So when I send resources to the second tower, they don't have any tools in which to efficiently [50:06] dispatch traffic. So, I mean, just the architecture of the system is the big part of the problem there. [50:12] So we should address that. The second issue, as it relates to design, if we had modern airspace design, [50:19] we wouldn't have to do miles and trail 20 miles, you know, over Chicago and back in order to sequence [50:25] traffic. We could sequence that traffic at altitude and then do power off descents into the terminal [50:30] environment. So we can get double winds here by reducing workload, sequencing traffic at top of [50:36] descent and reducing noise significantly while driving traffic efficiency, all with modernization. [50:43] Can I beg you to pay raise part? As far as the pay raise concerns, let's be clear. [50:48] I have the utmost respect for our air traffic controllers. I value the work that they do. As a [50:52] pilot myself, I rely on them. So I am grateful that we have them up there. We are supercharging the hiring. [50:59] I will correct one thing for the record. They did get the one percent federal pay increase in January. They [51:04] also have their contractual pay increase of 1.6 percent that they got in June. So as far as the 2.8 percent, [51:12] gosh, I could quote you the actual language of the statute. But Congress asked me to look for ways to [51:19] improve staffing efficiency. That's what you asked me to do. And if we could get it, then we would do the [51:27] 2.8 percent as part of that. And we have not been able to- [51:30] Respectfully, you seem to be put in a condition on something that we passed by what you just said. [51:35] The condition is the condition that you put on it, sir. I can find the language and read it to you. [51:40] Was it a condition that you could do something else and not give them the full 3.8 percent? [51:46] Well, the language says specifically that such a judgment has been implemented such that all [51:52] employees to the extent the administrator determines in his sole discretion that improvements in workforce [51:57] scheduling, staffing utilization, or other operational efficiencies are achieved. [52:02] Well, I'll close, but if they heard what you just said, they wouldn't think that you're showing [52:07] them the full respect. Show them the full 3.8 percent to show their respect to what we need them for. [52:14] Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Quigley. Ms. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And first of all, [52:19] let me say thank you, Administrator Budford, for visiting the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center. [52:23] As Mr. Cole mentioned, it's incredibly important to Oklahoma. And we appreciate the students that are [52:30] training there to keep our skies safe every day. The goal for 2026 was 2,200 trainees to go through [52:38] the academy. We've exceeded that number. And I think it's impressive because there were only a little [52:44] less than 1,600 trainees that went through the academy just two years ago under the Biden administration. [52:51] So thank you for focusing on ensuring that we are increasing the number of trainees that are coming [52:57] through. Secretary Duffy and President Trump have prioritized air traffic safety and continuing [53:04] to invest in the future of aviation. So we're very appreciative. I want to just circle back quickly [53:10] about a comment that Chairman Cole made in regards to expansion of training facilities. I want to make [53:19] clear, I have not heard you say and I want to confirm that you are not looking to build a second [53:24] training facility in the country. Is that correct? No, we have no plans to build a [53:30] second training facility. Perfect. Thank you for clarifying that. There have been some discussions [53:35] about potentially retiring the RNAV systems to include ILS systems at two airports in my district, [53:43] Shawnee Regional Airport as well as Wiley Post Airport. And I just want to say that with the 2028 Olympics [53:50] coming up, we're hosting multiple events in Oklahoma City in the 5th District, I would strongly discourage [53:55] retiring these systems because we would like to keep them for redundancy purposes to keep pilots and [54:02] passengers safe. So I want to make sure I touch on that. Moving on to actual questions, I've been briefed [54:09] a couple on a couple of activities that could accelerate and ensure that cutting edge technologies like [54:16] high-power microwave systems can be tested safely within the United States. What additional authority [54:21] or resources does the FAA need to expedite those efforts? Well, so today, as you may be aware, we [54:28] have, I assume you're talking about counter-UAS systems? Correct. Yes, sir. We have nine test facilities [54:33] for UAS systems. We would like to turn those into both UAS and counter-UAS. And I think we could [54:41] stand to have more than nine. I think the demands on these training facilities are pretty significant. [54:47] So I think the country could benefit in terms of innovation and designing these systems if we had [54:54] more resource available to test and train in. Do you feel like the current FAA authorities will [55:02] sufficiently allow for live testing at third-party ranges? For example, we have the Emerging Aviation [55:07] Technology Center in the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma. Do you feel like there's any changes that need to be [55:12] made from an authority standpoint to continue to expand those? My understanding, and I'll qualify [55:18] that by saying it is my understanding, is that we have pretty strong discretion in terms of what we [55:23] can do on the ranges. I think what we, again, want to make sure is whatever testing we're doing there [55:29] does not interfere with any active aviation services that we're offering. You mentioned you'd like to [55:35] see more than nine. Is there some sort of limitation that's prohibiting you from expanding that number? The [55:39] current statute caps it at nine. So there is a statutory change that needs to happen to be [55:43] able to expand? If we're going to increase the number of ranges, not necessarily what we do on [55:48] each range. Okay, perfect. The FAA's safety data transformation challenge showed that AI can identify [55:56] and mitigate safety risk across the NAS. Given the recent concerns about AI, how are you ensuring that new [56:04] technology that's being incorporated keeps decision making to the skilled air traffic controller's hands? [56:10] Yes, so I realize this is a topic of popular conversation right now. You know, AI comes in many [56:18] shades, you know, from machine learning or AI enabled. The way the FAA thinks about the use of AI is a [56:25] decision help tool, not a decision replacement tool. So, you know, we're not taking humans out of the loop. [56:31] When we look at AI that we're currently using in our safety foundry platform, essentially what we're [56:37] asking the AI to do is go look at the entirety of data and you tell us if you're seeing trends or [56:43] correlation or causation that I can't see. And it is fantastic at parsing through terabytes of data [56:50] and bringing things to us. We don't then say, oh, the AI says to do this, let's go do this. It brings us back [56:56] the data and then we apply human, you know, intuition and oversight to it. So, again, it is a fantastic [57:03] decision support tool and it will be revolutionized, revolutionary when we bring it into the national [57:09] airspace system. Ms. Administrator, thank you for what you do. Thank you for focusing on making sure [57:15] that we continue to keep our skies safe and without Mr. Chairman, I yield. Thank you, Ms. Vice. Ms. Watson Coleman. [57:21] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Administrator, for enlightening us in many ways, [57:25] particularly as it relates to the modernization of infrastructure. I am concerned, however, [57:32] with regard to your response to the Congressman's question regarding the 2.8 [57:38] pay raise. And I think that what you described is almost a catch 22 situation. You want more efficiency. [57:46] You don't think they've met that efficiency. You don't think that they're working as effectively, [57:51] but then you say you're understaffed. They say that they're working six days a week, sometimes 10 [57:56] hours a day, sometimes even more, and then have a responsibility to do training. They're contending [58:02] that the morale in the agency is very bad and that you seem to be operating it as if you're a corporate [58:09] bottom line person who is concerned about money. And that's what I'm concerned about because I'm concerned [58:20] about safety. And I'm concerned about respecting the work that the air traffic controllers should, [58:26] must do to keep us safe. And I want to know why, in your discretion, because it is solely your discretion, [58:33] you have not given them the 3.8 percent increase. It just seems like a very modest request [58:42] for employees that's so vitally important to our well-being. [58:45] Well, ma'am, in full transparency, I am trying to honor the language that's in the bill. [58:51] The language that's in the bill is that you are the one that have the, excuse me, sir, [58:57] you have the discretion to give these 3.8 percent increases. It is in your discretion. So what are [59:08] you trying to honor? I'm trying to honor the language that says operational efficiencies are achieved that [59:15] will contribute to addressing workforce shortfalls and enhancing aviation safety. [59:19] Thank you. So it is your contention that you don't have operational efficiency while you have [59:25] understaffing, overworked individuals that are responsible for the safety of air traffic. Is that [59:36] what you're saying? What I'm saying is I lean into the data. I know you're listening to a lot of [59:41] anecdotal information that's coming back to you, but the data will tell us something entirely different. [59:47] So you know what I'm concerned about? You may look at data, but I listen to people. And if I hear [59:53] consistently that the people that we as Congress are supposed to protect are being negatively impacted, [1:00:01] that the people responsible for our safety in the airways are in fact depressed and overworked and [1:00:08] have mental health issues that aren't even being addressed appropriately, I listen to that. When I [1:00:14] hear it more than once and I hear it in more than one distribution of information, I recognize it [1:00:23] that it's more than just anecdotal. And so I ask you right now, what specifically would it take for you [1:00:32] to give this 3.8 percent increase to these individuals? And what are you going to do to help [1:00:40] them to be in a position to receive it? And I want to know when and what? Well, the answer to your [1:00:48] question is in the 2026 workforce plan. I ask you the question. You give me the answer. Don't tell me to [1:00:55] read something. Just give me the answer. Respectfully, sir. Yes. The answer is over the last 15 years, [1:01:01] we've seen the efficiency of our controller schedules decrease from five hours on position [1:01:05] to under four hours on position. And I don't think that makes sense to me. I think we can schedule our [1:01:12] workforce more efficiently to get back to where we were 15 years ago. How long have you been in this [1:01:18] position? 14 months. 14 months? What? Okay. You're not going to answer this question. So let me just [1:01:28] share with you what I think. I think that the complaints that I'm hearing from various [1:01:35] avenues are legitimate. I think that the morale in the agency is very low and that's very concerning [1:01:43] to me because of the work that they're responsible for doing. I think that the fact that people are [1:01:50] walking away before even spending all the time that they could to accumulate full pension [1:01:57] is something that has to do with why we have delays in Newark Airport, why we have delays in other [1:02:03] airports, why O'Hare has delays. And I think that we are not looking at or this administration doesn't [1:02:13] value the work that people do on behalf of the country and behalf of the safety and security of our [1:02:23] nation. And I think that you need to look down and talk to those people that you are in charge of and you [1:02:29] need to have a better understanding of what their concerns are and how you could improve the morale [1:02:37] there as well as the safety and security in our airspace. Well, respectfully disagree, ma'am. [1:02:41] And I think that you're failing in that as this administration has. And I yield back. [1:02:46] Continue to hire and we'll put them in facilities that don't look like a junkyard. So why don't we invest in [1:02:52] building facilities for them where they have plumbing and air conditioning and working elevators? [1:02:58] So yes, let's get adequately staffed. That too. But let's move on it and let's deal with the human [1:03:05] aspects of what's happening. I've been over three dozen of our facilities in the past 14 [1:03:09] minutes. So I'm out there talking to them. Then let us do what we're expecting you to do. [1:03:14] I'm doing exactly what you wrote in the law, ma'am. General lady yields back. Ms. Torres. [1:03:19] Thank you, chairman, and welcome to our committee. Thank you. Administrator Bedford. [1:03:26] My office sent you in advance some of my concerns so no one is surprised. As I was sharing with you [1:03:36] earlier, I proudly represent the Ontario International Airport. 15 years ago, the airport didn't have [1:03:43] local control or the local people did not have control of their airport. So I made it my mission [1:03:50] when I came to Congress in 2015 to figure out how we can get back to owning the locals owning that airport. [1:04:00] And with the help of Representative Ken Calvert, we accomplished that in just over a year [1:04:06] when I first got here. There are three appropriate appropriators that represent that region. [1:04:14] Representative Aguilar, myself, and Representative Calvert. And we're very committed to ensuring [1:04:20] the economic growth of that region. So I want to I want to first of all, I want to invite you [1:04:28] to visit the airport and the region and really assess for yourself and maybe your team can help us [1:04:36] assess the needs, the growing needs of the region. Since Ontario took or the locals took local control [1:04:45] of the airport, it has supported 24,000 jobs. It added $5 billion to the regional economy. [1:04:54] It added $5 billion to the regional economy. Passenger numbers have nearly doubled to more than 7 million [1:04:59] passengers. And my favorite part is that you can still get from the curb and through security in [1:05:07] about a quarter of the time as any other airport in the region. Ontario is one of America's busiest cargo [1:05:15] airports and an important piece of the national supply chain. [1:05:19] which is why I co-lead the bipartisan air caucus, air cargo caucus. This past year alone, [1:05:27] I was proud to be able to secure $33 million in catch-up dollars because during the time that we did not [1:05:34] have control, all of that slowed down. There was no airport improvements that were being done. So, [1:05:41] Mr. Bedford, Ontario is an excellent example of what a growing airport looks like. It is well managed. [1:05:51] And again, I want to invite you. I want you to commit to me today. I think that's an easy commitment. [1:05:56] I'll be happy to. To send your team and to come out and visit with us so that you can see the challenge [1:06:02] that we have before us. Thank you for that. We'll follow up with you. I recently met with our air traffic [1:06:10] controllers and just a little different approach. I have tremendous respect as you do in admiration [1:06:16] for the work that they do. It's really, really critical work. The FAA classifies the Ontario [1:06:22] air traffic control facility at a level five. The classification does not reflect the operational [1:06:30] complexity of the airspace, which includes 24-hour operations, complicated overnight traffic and cargo [1:06:38] demands, and leaves our air traffic controllers with less pay, less training dollars, and lower priority [1:06:46] for technology upgrades. And it's those technology upgrades that I'm also critically concerned about. [1:06:54] The towers should be reviewed and reclassified so our air traffic controllers are properly recognized [1:07:01] and given the resources that they need in order to maintain the the experienced personnel that we need [1:07:08] in the region. As you're very well aware because of my most recent complaints to the FAA, we have a lot [1:07:15] of training schools in the area and suddenly with the tax opportunities for private jet owners, we have [1:07:26] a whole new group of people that are training in the area. That area is very busy. It's very busy. [1:07:32] So again, I hope that you would reconsider looking at that category five that they would that they have been [1:07:40] put into and that and that we could improve the staffing level for that airport. So just by way of [1:07:48] background, those levels are collectively bargained. And the last time they were collectively bargained was [1:07:55] just as the Biden administration was leaving. So that was December of 2024. The contract was amended and those [1:08:04] levels were reassessed. And when it doesn't make sense to me how an airport that creates that much [1:08:12] work in the in the region. And it is such an economic engine would have less staff than the than a little [1:08:22] airport that is right next to my home, Laverne bracket field. Well, that that shouldn't the the level [1:08:30] sets the pay. It doesn't set the staffing. So I'll take a look at that. Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. [1:08:35] I yield back. Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bedford, thank you for being here today. And I [1:08:45] want to talk a little bit about a general aviation airport in Jacksonville, Florida, which is in kind [1:08:51] of a unique situation. As you may or may not know, following a decision by the 1993 BRAC Commission, [1:09:01] they closed Naval Air Station Cecil Field. And that airfield was decommissioned in 1999 [1:09:08] and was transferred to the Jacksonville Aviation Authority. However, it proudly remains [1:09:16] critical to a variety of national defense, particularly the Fleet Readiness Center Southeast [1:09:24] and plays a critical role in federal counter narcotics operations, the Hitron from the Coast Guard, [1:09:32] the helicopter interdiction tactical squadron that is stationed out there flying both the MH-65E and the [1:09:42] P-3s out of there. They have over 200 personnel there. And their tempo is very high with, you know, [1:09:51] the interdiction that we're seeing in the Caribbean now. But so they are truly meeting the needs of the [1:10:04] Department of War and the Department of Homeland Security. And it's becoming a major military maintenance [1:10:12] repair center, as I mentioned with Fleet Readiness Southeast. And we see these operations can just [1:10:18] continuing to expand. And in fact, Cecil played a critical role, you may know, in staging area for [1:10:28] the aircraft that went to Venezuela during that great operation snatching Maduro out of bed. [1:10:36] Now, Cecil, as you know, Cecil has a very large infrastructure. They have one 12,503 foot runway, [1:10:47] was actually used for space reentry, even with the shuttles, is a standby. Then it has an additional [1:10:56] three 8,000 foot runways. With all of this work that's going on, yet because it's a typical, [1:11:04] it's not your typical general aviation airport. It really is more of a military airfield. [1:11:12] But it isn't eligible to compete for grants. And so what I'd like to ask is if we could work with you [1:11:20] and your staff to look at some, maybe some type of way that we can expand the grant opportunities [1:11:30] to help maintain the runways, the aprons, the taxiways, because it is a massive effort. [1:11:41] And I'd like to know if the FAA, if you all would be willing to help us with that. [1:11:47] So I think there are two, perhaps three things we should talk about. First is I think we believe that [1:11:54] airport should be eligible for AIP, but it'll have to apply. So there's probably some education that we [1:12:00] need to do to make sure they understand what is available to them. Second issue are workforce [1:12:05] grants. So if there really is workforce development that's going on, whether that's aviation technicians [1:12:10] or construction, there may be things that we can do there from a workforce grant perspective. [1:12:15] We've, I think we're close to issuing 26 million in workforce grants. We have another 40 that we can [1:12:20] issue going into the next fiscal year. And then finally, as I understand, CECL is a contract tower, [1:12:27] not an actual federally owned tower. We do have a program that looks at smaller towers, you know, [1:12:35] that are federal contract towers, not FAA managed towers. We have two that we're working through that [1:12:40] process now, Mesa Gateway and Bozeman. This might be an airport that should have a look at to see [1:12:47] whether or not it should move from a contractor tower to a federal tower. [1:12:51] Okay. Thank you very much. We'll get with you and talk some more about that because it really is a [1:12:58] critical need out there. You mentioned the copper wiring. You're at about 64% now, I think. [1:13:05] Sir, sir. From your comments today. Can you talk just a little bit about if we are in the success that [1:13:17] you may be having with already integrating because of the fiber optics, the high-speed cable you've [1:13:25] already been able to put in? Is that, have we removed all of the visual separation of helicopters [1:13:37] and commercial flights now? So the, in response to the safety data that we're seeing earlier this year, [1:13:44] in March, we issued what's referred to as a general notice and the general notice prohibits now [1:13:50] employing visual separation as a, as a means of practical separation between two traveling aircraft, [1:13:58] helicopter and a fixed wing aircraft in class B airspace arrival and departure corridors and class C [1:14:05] airspace arrival and departure corridors and any place where we have a terminal radar approach [1:14:10] capability. So where we can separate traffic with actual controllers and positive radar separation, [1:14:18] that is the requirement now. Okay. Good. Thank you. My time's up. I yield back. Mr. Aguilar. [1:14:25] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Administrator, thank you for being here today. I am a district adjacent to [1:14:31] Ms. Torres, and so we appreciate you committing to, to come out to visit the region. You were just talking [1:14:37] about AIP with Mr. Rutherford and we're thankful that the FAA has awarded, uh, recent grant programs, [1:14:45] uh, recent AIP dollars to the region. Investments like these keep our airports safe and competitive, [1:14:52] boost our economy and support good paying jobs for the region. I hope we can count on the FAA's [1:14:58] continued partnership to ensure this program remains fully funded and to be able to get funds out the [1:15:03] door quickly. Uh, I wanted to turn to another issue I've raised previously, um, that would benefit, uh, [1:15:10] the region. Last year, I asked your predecessor for a status update on the implementation of legislation, [1:15:16] uh, that I carried, uh, the disadvantaged business enterprise supportive services expansion act, [1:15:23] which was incorporated into the FAA reauthorization act of 2024. This law directed the FAA to create a [1:15:29] disadvantaged business enterprise program to give minority and women-owned businesses a fair shot at [1:15:34] competing for local airport contracts. Uh, do you have a status update, uh, on this? I know the [1:15:42] administration has attacked programs like this in the past, and I just want to tell you how important [1:15:48] it is for businesses to have an opportunity to compete for federal resources. Uh, could you share the [1:15:55] status of the disadvantaged business enterprise program at the FAA? Uh, well, in all honesty, I'd [1:16:01] rather go back and get more knowledgeable about it. I do know that the administration has gone through [1:16:07] sort of a recalibration of, uh, its processes and priorities. I believe that is done now, so I should [1:16:14] be able to give you a better response than what I'm able to do right now. Just a reminder, this was [1:16:19] legislative language here, so, uh, and I, I, I, I understand you know that, so, uh, this, you know, [1:16:26] carries the, the, the weight of law, so, uh, understand, um, that you might need to get, uh, up to [1:16:32] speed on this, and I talked to your predecessor about this, uh, as I mentioned, but would, uh, welcome [1:16:37] an opportunity to talk with you about this, uh, in the future as well, after you get some time. We'll follow [1:16:41] up with your office. I appreciate it. Um, Administrator, last November, the DOT, the DOT withdrew, uh, [1:16:49] Biden-era proposed rule that would have required airlines to provide compensation, meals, hotel, [1:16:54] and transportation for cancellations or delays of three or more hours due to factors within the [1:17:00] airline's own control. Airline-caused delays and cancellations stemming from crew scheduling or [1:17:06] maintenance issues frequently disrupt millions of Americans travel every year, and American consumers [1:17:12] foot the bill. Uh, in response to Ms. Watson Coleman, you said that you were driven by data. Uh, the [1:17:19] data of your own agency showed that 60 percent of the delays of long domestic delays were airline [1:17:26] caused, not weather or air traffic related. Why rescind the rule? Uh, I really can't speak [1:17:33] intelligently to that. Uh, you know, I'm not into involved in the DOT assessment on those sorts of [1:17:39] issues. I mean, I can speak to modernization or workforce staffing or anything FAA related. [1:17:44] Did they ask you or the FAA anything related to the rule? I, I couldn't say. Me personally, no, but [1:17:51] I don't know if they asked somebody else at FAA. Sure, sure. Do you think that it's fair for the [1:17:56] American public to pay, uh, to, to pay for the delays? Um, I, I really don't have... You're, you're, [1:18:04] you're a pilot yourself. You're a consumer. Um... The data that I've seen would indicate that [1:18:08] between weather and what air traffic control service has caused, that is the vast majority of delays in the [1:18:14] system today. It's not what your own data says, though. Well, we should compare notes. So we've [1:18:19] got a second takeaway. Go back to you on the small business re-auth piece, and then we'll compare the [1:18:23] data on, uh, delayed causals. Sure, I'd welcome it. You said that you were guided by data, so I'd just [1:18:29] like to know if that's, if that's true or not. If your agency's own data was the subject for the [1:18:33] Department of Transportation, um, to make a decision, uh, I'd be curious to know, uh, what data you folks [1:18:40] were looking at. Um, that's fair. I look forward to the conversation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:18:45] Yield back. Mr. Joyce, you're recognized for five minutes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [1:18:58] Good morning. Good morning. Unauthorized drones continue to pose a potential threat to critical [1:19:03] infrastructure and pose military installations across the country, including the possibility [1:19:08] that hostile actors could use drones to conduct surveillance or facilitate an attack. Given that [1:19:13] the FAA manages the national airspace system, while DHS, DOJ, and DOW have varying authorities [1:19:19] to detect and counter these threats, how is the FAA coordinating with these agencies to ensure [1:19:24] unauthorized drone activity over critical infrastructure and military facilities is quickly [1:19:29] identified and addressed? Further, are there any gaps in FAA's current authorities, technology, or [1:19:34] interagency coordination that are preventing the federal government from effectively deterring and [1:19:39] responding to these threats? Well, thank you for the question. It's certainly top of mind [1:19:43] these days. I will tell you today we're coordinating much better than we were a year ago. Good. [1:19:48] So, um, the president and his team have a significant line of sight on drones and, um, it's, it's an [1:19:56] interesting policy choice that we're in because on the one hand we want, we see tremendous commercial [1:20:01] opportunities for drones and the convenience that they can bring for the American consumers. I mean, [1:20:06] imagine seniors who can stay at home and have medicine flown in real time, you know, right to their door. [1:20:13] So they're, and we're seeing over a million drone operations per month just in Dallas, [1:20:18] Fort Worth, and it's expanding across the country. So on the one hand, uh, the president would like us [1:20:23] to unleash American drone dominance, to onshore the production and innovation on drones, which we can [1:20:30] then of course see the, the military applications of these. So let's onshore that innovation here in America. And so [1:20:37] unleashing commercial drone dominance will unleash drone innovation. Of course, um, if we have one bad [1:20:45] actor, you know, of course we have some folks who are ignorant of the law. Today the law requires drones [1:20:51] to stay out of sensitive areas, uh, sporting events, things of that nature. But even at World Cup where we had [1:20:58] a massive oversight on, on it, we still had 700 people operating drones where they shouldn't have been [1:21:06] out of ignorance. So I think that's the number one issue that we face is someone flying a drone where [1:21:11] it just shouldn't be. As long as all 700 could be presumed to be ignorant. Well, so we, we caught all 700 [1:21:19] of them. Good. And you know, so law enforcement, we do have means by which we can identify the operator of the drone. Now, [1:21:25] but what we're really worried about is the, uh, the nefarious actor who isn't playing by the rules. [1:21:31] And so for that, we need a different form of surveillance on the southern border. We created a [1:21:35] buffer, five mile buffer across the entire southern border. Uh, we've created space for a counter drone [1:21:42] capability that has been deployed now and certified by, or validated by FAA to operate under the, uh, auspices [1:21:49] of both military and Department of Homeland Services. So, uh, in, in the short answer, we recognize the [1:21:55] threat. The federal government recognizes the severity of the threat and is taking action. [1:22:00] I think we could move faster. Uh, again, it wasn't, wasn't being actioned under the prior administration. [1:22:05] So we are working rapidly to catch up with where the technology is, but I think we've got the right [1:22:11] line of sight on it. We've got the right team within the administration across all agencies focused on it. [1:22:17] Well, sir, when an unauthorized drone is identified operating over military installation or other [1:22:23] restricted critical infrastructure, what steps do you take, uh, to investigate and enforce against [1:22:28] the operator? How many of these incidents have you referred for civil enforcement or criminal [1:22:32] prosecution and what penalties are currently available to deter individuals or potentially [1:22:36] malicious actors from repeatedly violating these restrictions? Uh, so, um, I can't give you [1:22:42] specific numbers. We do have them hundreds, dozens, thousands. I'm not sure what the specific number is, [1:22:48] but yes, there is a, we do have, um, electronic conspicuity on drones. They're required to broadcast. [1:22:55] Uh, they broadcast on mobile channels. Law enforcement is able to obtain those broadcasts to identify who the [1:23:01] drone operator is and actually locate the drone operator. So, um, we, we are referring those for prosecution. [1:23:09] Uh, one last one, and this is, uh, one at home, you know, which is very important. Uh, an issue at Lake [1:23:19] County Executive Airport involving runway 23. The airport is currently operating under a NOTAM that [1:23:25] limits nighttime instrument approaches, and airport officials have indicated the FAA has told them that [1:23:29] NOTAM can be removed once the required nighttime evaluation of the runway is completed. The airport [1:23:34] has been working to get that evaluation scheduled, but has had significant, significant difficulty [1:23:40] getting that date set on the calendar. Given this appears to be the last remaining step, can I ask [1:23:46] you to, uh, help me in making sure we can get that done in short order? I can't even get my hometown ILS [1:23:52] certified, so I'm not sure. I'm going to be a lot of help there, but I'll take it back, and we'll, we'll see [1:23:58] what we can do. Thank you very much for your time, sir. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Shreve. [1:24:02] Thank you, Chairman Womack. Administrator, uh, I'm the newest member, uh, of the subcommittee, but I served on [1:24:12] TNI and the aviation subcommittee, and so we had an opportunity to visit a time or two on subject matter, [1:24:19] including, uh, drones that we wrestled with mightily, uh, on aviation subcommittee. Um, I'm a Hoosier, [1:24:28] as are you. I represent, uh, uh, part of IND, the terminal and the FedEx infrastructures in, in Indiana 6th [1:24:37] district, uh, and so in the, in the vein of Mr. Joyce's questions, the commercialization of drones in a [1:24:47] distribution-based part of, uh, America is a great big deal. Indiana is in a drone corridor. Um, the, um, [1:24:59] on the issue of the drone infrastructure inspection grants, I mean, drones have been a material advancement [1:25:06] in the utility of inspecting America's built infrastructure. We don't have to have old bell [1:25:12] helicopters running along utility lines and so forth, uh, and we're wrestling with infrastructure [1:25:18] maintenance, uh, mightily, uh, certain TNI committee and here on T-HUD. Uh, but there's this, uh, grant [1:25:24] program that Congress, uh, authorized in 24. I was not here then, uh, but funded, uh, as part of the 26th [1:25:32] fiscal year DOT appropriation. I was here, um, and DOT, I believe FAA is involved in the administration [1:25:42] of that program. Is that, is that accurate? Um, I'll be honest with you, I'm unaware of it. [1:25:47] Oh, okay. I'm about to get aware of it. All right. Can you, uh, if, if you don't know, would you, [1:25:53] would you please find and report back on what the department and FAA is doing to ensure the [1:25:59] swift implementation of the grant program for this fiscal year, fiscal year 26, as this committee [1:26:08] considers program funding for fiscal year 27? I will do so. I would appreciate that. Um, also in the [1:26:18] vein of, uh, drones, uh, beyond visual line of sight, BVLOS, not, not a familiar acronym to a lot of [1:26:27] people, but can you share how the department and the FAA has revised the BVLOS proposed rule to ensure [1:26:36] that lifesaving public safety operations already happening at scale, uh, today across America will [1:26:43] not be negatively implemented? Uh, I can. I mean, the, the BVLOS is, uh, as you can imagine, it is a [1:26:52] foundational bill in terms of how we're going to reconcile good drone use versus bad drone use. [1:26:59] Um, it wasn't initially intended to be that. It was intentionally intended to be a good drone use, [1:27:03] but we want to future proof that now by making sure that we've got the right, uh, sandbox around how [1:27:10] drones will operate in a way that we can easily identify bad actors and mitigate those threats. So [1:27:15] that, that rule's taken a little bit longer to get out, but I think the reason for the delay [1:27:19] is common sense. Um, it is a rule that has got a lot of eyesight all across, uh, government right now, [1:27:27] and some of it is, um, um, um, you know, we're not quite there, but we're working our way through it. Uh, [1:27:34] as it relates to law enforcement, they will have primacy. They will, they will have full unfettered [1:27:39] access to airspace drone. Other drones will stand aside, uh, as law enforcement is taking care of their [1:27:46] first responder obligations. I want to, I want to circle back to the close to, um, controller staffing. Sure. Uh, [1:27:53] sure. Uh, you updated us on that earlier in your remarks, but taking it close to home in Indianapolis, [1:28:01] IND, uh, Mario Rodriguez, uh, our friend is actually out here, I believe today with our state chamber board. [1:28:08] Um, the, uh, the shortages, the acute shortages that we've wrestled with, uh, in the New York, [1:28:14] New Jersey, uh, airspace play right on through to IND and Columbus and, and, and other secondary, uh, [1:28:23] mid-sized airport markets. I wrestle with it as a, as a consumer. Um, can you offer as best you may [1:28:33] an updated timeline to getting the, the controller staffing in the New York, New Jersey airspace [1:28:39] up to where we've got to get to before, so it doesn't directly acutely affect airspace such as IND? [1:28:48] Uh, well, so first of all, let's all acknowledge that the controller workforce shortage is a decades [1:28:55] long problem. This isn't something that the Trump administration invented. Uh, we inherited a really [1:29:00] poor hand and we're playing that hand out the best we can. You've provided budget for us to [1:29:05] supercharge hiring. Thank you for that. And we've taken that budget and we've hired over 2,000 people [1:29:10] in fiscal 25. Another 2,200 are in the door as we speak. Another 2,300 are, we're already, you know, [1:29:18] in the identification and onboarding process. Okay. That's fine. Great. You're doing all the hiring [1:29:23] that you can. There's a lot of work between hiring and then training someone before they can actually [1:29:29] dispatch traffic. And yet there's another effect of whether we can get them to go to New York. Um, [1:29:35] that is the most difficult place in the national aviation system to, to staff. Um, I'm not sure why, [1:29:43] but we've got to figure that out. So even if I could fully staff the NAS, I can't make people go [1:29:50] work in New York. Uh, we've got to figure out why. I don't know if, and, and, and shame on me, [1:29:55] I haven't been there yet. So in full disclosure, that's on my to-do list before the end of the fiscal [1:30:00] year. Administrator, I appreciate that and can understand that. I don't think a lot of people [1:30:06] realize that our controllers have to retire at age 56, which certainly adds to the challenge. [1:30:13] Well, they don't have to. So there is, you can ask for an exemption and the secretary can grant [1:30:20] an exemption and he has granted exemptions. And he's added, I think a $30,000 a year incentive for [1:30:27] controllers, uh, to stick around longer. Um, but yes, after 25 years and at age 56, you can retire with a [1:30:35] full pension. Thank you. I appreciate it. I yield back. Mr. Siskamani. Thank you, Chairman Womack. [1:30:41] And, uh, thank you also, Mr. Bradford, for being here with us today and spending time with us, [1:30:46] answering some of the questions on the, on the priorities of, of the FAA. Um, I actually would [1:30:52] like to start off by saying that I'd love to have you in Arizona so you can see for yourself some of the [1:30:58] great investments. Can we do that in February? What was that? Can we do that in February? We, [1:31:01] I was going to invite you in August, see how committed you really are. But, uh, but yes, [1:31:06] I, I think you can be picking the spring is a good time to, to be there. And actually, [1:31:11] it wouldn't be a bad timeline given some of the, the, these investments in these projects [1:31:16] and what we can, what we can do and what state they will be in. So the first one I want to bring [1:31:20] up to you is the Pinal Air Park, our traffic control tower. This is a, a key one for us. Uh, I, [1:31:26] I want to thank you and the FAA for accepting the, uh, Pinal Air Park into the federal contact [1:31:33] tower, the, the FCT program. As you know, the air park supports more than 100,000 commercial [1:31:39] and military flight operations each year, making a new tower, a major investment in the region's [1:31:44] aviation safety economy and military readiness as well. Uh, I was able to secure 1.6 million in the [1:31:51] FY27 T HUD bill for the initial stages of the tower construction. This is an area in Arizona that is [1:31:57] growing exponentially right in Pinal County. It's in between Tucson and Phoenix. So this is an area [1:32:02] where a lot of people work, a lot of people are moving in as well, more traffic there. Could you [1:32:06] walk us through the next steps for the local and the regional airports across, uh, the country and [1:32:11] specifically this one, the, uh, FCT program? Well, so, uh, the FCT program, I think, is a wonderful way [1:32:18] for us to look at emerging airports and provide them with control services that otherwise they [1:32:23] wouldn't qualify for a federal tower. Um, so, uh, and, uh, in doing so as we create more contract [1:32:32] towers, we're also creating another workforce, uh, feeder stream, you know, because as they gain [1:32:37] experience in the contract tower program, they then become eligible to transfer into the federal, uh, [1:32:43] air traffic control services organization. So I think that it actually, there's multiple benefits [1:32:50] there. As far as, uh, where my heart is, if you look over the last 25 years, we've seen a continuous [1:32:57] decrease in service to small town America. And it's unfortunate because driving is certainly much less [1:33:04] safe, much more expensive, I think, um, and less convenient. And so being able to reconnect small town [1:33:09] America to the nation's air transportation system, I think is, has to be one of our, our key priorities. [1:33:16] Aside from safety, aside from efficiency, we want more people flying and we want them to be able to [1:33:21] fly with convenience. We used to have service in South Bend and Evansville and Fort Wayne. And I mean, [1:33:27] we've lost service in so many places, Terre Haute. Um, it's unfortunate, uh, through the, uh, increase of [1:33:34] advanced air mobility, electrified, you know, small aircraft. Again, I think this is going to be our [1:33:39] opportunity to reconnect a lot of small town America safely and efficiently to the national air [1:33:44] transportation system. So I think that's a place where we really should lean in. Great. Well, thank [1:33:49] you. Um, I was just right before this actually, as they walked in meeting with some of the folks from [1:33:54] home and the, uh, regarding the Tucson, Tucson airport as well, the Tucson international airport [1:33:59] and the Tucson airport authority. So on that, my, my next question is, uh, the, the Tucson airport authority, [1:34:05] which is in the middle of, uh, an airfield safety enhancement project, uh, program project. While [1:34:11] the airport has been fortunate to secure significant grant funding, which they're very grateful for, [1:34:16] the uncertainty has been difficult as they plan, uh, the various faces moving, moving forward. As you [1:34:21] know, the FAA engages in letters of intent in various projects, but not airfield safety projects. So, [1:34:28] um, what prevents the FAA from entering into letters of intent for airfield safety projects? And, and [1:34:35] could the FAA enter into a letter of intent with airports that outline, that outline the, uh, its [1:34:41] financial commitments, particularly for multi-layer projects and multi-year projects, such as the airfield [1:34:48] safety enhancement program, which can take up to about 10 years to complete? Yeah. So, um, I'm not thoroughly [1:34:55] versed in how letters of intent work with individual airports. I'm aware we have executed one with [1:34:59] Tucson for I think $175 million. So we, I know we do them and we do them in ways to be collaborative. [1:35:07] Um, but I, I think sitting here today, the funds that we do get through budget are finite. I think we [1:35:13] have $4 billion in our AIP program. Uh, over 400 airports want access to those funds. They're segmented [1:35:20] between small, medium, and large hub airport. So, uh, again, we try to get the money out the doors [1:35:26] efficiently and as quickly as we can and respect the, uh, constraints that the legislation requires. [1:35:32] Right. So I, that, that letter of intent has been helpful in the planning phases of it. [1:35:37] When it comes to safety projects, sometimes that doesn't seem to apply as well. So I'm interested to [1:35:41] know what the, the reasoning behind that, what could be done, and, and what are the options there. [1:35:46] I'm out of time, so we can talk that offline. I'd be happy to, if we have a safety issue there, [1:35:50] I'd sure like to know about it. Sure. We'd love to work with you on that. [1:35:53] Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Go back. Thank you. Um, that completes our, our, uh, first round. [1:35:59] And, um, I, I'm gonna extend the subcommittee hearing, uh, briefly. And if any of the members [1:36:06] remaining have a follow-up question they'd like to ask, be thinking about that right now, [1:36:11] I'd like to do kind of a lightning round and, and, and let me begin. Um, Administrator Bedford, [1:36:19] I want to turn, uh, to your efforts on new automation software that I've seen demonstrated. [1:36:27] It's, it's fascinating. Um, in June of 26, your agency awarded a 12-year contract for the flow [1:36:34] management data services platform, FMDS, and the new strategic management of airspace routes [1:36:40] and trajectories, the smart capability. As I said, I, I, I, I've looked at it, it's, uh, to me, [1:36:47] it's fascinating. Uh, and you're also pursuing a common automation platform to replace aging systems [1:36:53] that track aircraft, ERAM and STARS, uh, to be specific. Give us your thoughts on these platforms, [1:37:03] um, your vision and timeline for getting smart and capped developed and deployed. And how to, [1:37:08] how to, how did the, how does this fit in the broader, uh, modernization program? [1:37:13] Uh, well, thank you for the question, Chairman Womack. I think this is the, [1:37:17] this may be the most difficult element of modernization to actually wrap your, [1:37:22] your brain around. Because when we talk about phase one, which is all infrastructure, [1:37:27] it, it, it's tangible, right? We can see whether a tower is being built. We can see a radar being [1:37:32] installed. I was at Newark two weeks ago with the secretary. We were literally dropping the crane [1:37:36] with the new radar, surface movement radar in place. I mean, so we can see it. We can see [1:37:41] trenching and new cabling and, you know, stuff shows up at the facilities. The redesign of the actual [1:37:49] traffic management systems, that doesn't, isn't something that we generally see. But if you do go to [1:37:54] our facilities, and I would be happy to go there with you if you're interested, um, what you'll see [1:37:59] is really old stuff that our controllers are using. I mean, it hasn't changed in 50 years. Even, you know, [1:38:07] we've modernized. We had a modernization effort in the 1980s. We kept the interfaces exactly the same as [1:38:13] they were in the 60s. That's the thing that really has to change. We have to rethink entirely the tools [1:38:19] that we have. And the good news is these systems exist today. They're scalable. The architecture [1:38:24] is nimble, and we can put them in the cloud where we can get unlimited compute power and make sure [1:38:28] they're cyber secure. So lots of benefits of moving from what we have today, which is 313 separate [1:38:37] air traffic control systems. You think of this as an integrated system. It's really not. We have 313 [1:38:44] individual air traffic control systems. Okay, the positive of that is when one goes down, like [1:38:50] Minneapolis center went down, I don't know, maybe six weeks ago due to a power outage. Not an FAA power [1:38:56] outage, but a city power outage. But it brought our center down. And Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Minnesota [1:39:02] went dark. No air, no coverage, no airplanes moving. The rest of the world, the rest of the system [1:39:10] continued to operate. But the point is those systems are so fragile, you know, that any one of them could [1:39:18] go in op at any time versus having the ubiquity of cloud based services where even if something's [1:39:24] happening locally, I can simply transfer that data to a place where I do have power and I can continue [1:39:30] to manage traffic. So three things. We've got to bring the systems into the 21st century. We've got [1:39:37] to bring our controller interfaces into the 21st century. And we have to bring our data architecture [1:39:43] into the 21st century. Today, all the data is local. So the New York data is in the New York [1:39:50] center and nobody else can see it. Now, the smart system that I demonstrated for you earlier, we've [1:39:56] taken a different data source, all the ADS-B data from the NAS, it's infused into that system. So I can [1:40:03] see more today on my iPad than any controller can see in the entire national aviation system. That's how [1:40:10] archaic the tools that we currently have are. So I do implore you for this second round of investment, [1:40:17] this is what will really supercharge our ability to safely grow traffic and reduce the workload and [1:40:24] strain on our controllers. So if you can do that with your iPad, why do we need air traffic controllers? [1:40:32] Can't you just run it all yourself? So again, that was a facetious question. [1:40:36] Yeah, sure, sure. We have layers and layers of safety. And at the end of the day, the human is [1:40:42] the final layer of safety. And sadly, we've seen where that's failed. And we don't want to have to [1:40:47] rely on human separation. We want these systems to be able to do it for them. But we need the human [1:40:53] there in case it's going to require more money to this second phase, which arguably is the most [1:41:00] important phase is at least another 10 billion. Thank you, Mr. Clyburn. [1:41:05] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me get back to this. Mr. Administrator, I've been here for over three [1:41:14] decades, but I spent about three decades as a manager of people, governmental entities. And as I read [1:41:27] the legislation on the pay raise, the intent was to put air traffic controllers on par with law [1:41:37] enforcement. That was intended at 3.8. Now, the discretion that was given to you had to do, [1:41:47] I think, with improving the environment and the folks, I suspect you may be having trouble getting [1:41:57] people to work up in New York because of their pay. And so it would seem to me if you give them their [1:42:05] pay raise that we give, I don't think the law gave you the authority to squeeze more work out of overworked, [1:42:17] overstressed workforce. So it would seem to me that this pay raise question, [1:42:26] you're taking some discretions not intended in the law, certainly not intended when Congress approved, [1:42:37] was to put them on par with other people doing similar work. And I know a little something about [1:42:44] being underpaid and overworked. So I think you're taking discretion that was not intended. Thank you for [1:42:53] that. Ms. Spice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To follow up on the line of questioning, [1:43:02] you mentioned in your earlier testimony that you're concerned about the number of hours that [1:43:09] are being logged by air traffic controllers. There's a discrepancy that you're trying to track. [1:43:14] Is that accurate? Well, so today we don't track controller time unless they're physically [1:43:20] separating traffic. So on an eight hour shift, they come in and they do work when it's assigned to them. [1:43:29] And then when there's no work assigned to them, we don't know for sure what they're doing. [1:43:33] You know, and that's not to say they're not doing work. We just don't know exactly what that work is [1:43:38] because we don't actually punch time cards or keep track of it. So what we can tell with the data that [1:43:45] we have is we can tell that, you know, 15 years ago we were operating many more hours on desk than we're [1:43:52] operating today. And so we've seen a consistent decrease in the amount of time on position today [1:43:59] and an increase in overtime usage. And that I think it's we should be curious why that is. We should [1:44:06] ask questions because that's what we should do. That's what you pay us to do. So we're asking questions [1:44:12] and what we're seeing are schedules that are very inefficient where I have controllers in facilities with [1:44:18] nothing to do. And I prefer to have controllers in facilities when there's actually work to be done. [1:44:23] That's what we're trying. And this isn't across the the entire FAA. This is really limited to about 40 facilities [1:44:30] across the country that need a deeper line of sight. And all I've asked our union partners to do with us [1:44:35] is work with me to look at those facilities to see if we can improve those schedules. [1:44:40] I yield. That's all I've asked. I personally just don't I can't wrap my head around time on station [1:44:48] or whatever you call it going down and overtime going higher. Those are the facts. Help me understand [1:44:57] why I can't wrap my head around that. What is it management? Well so it may be. But let's talk about [1:45:05] that. If we're doing a bad job of managing the workforce, let's figure that out and fix it. So I'm not [1:45:10] absolving management here. We absolutely may be the problem. But I'd like to work with our labor partners [1:45:16] to figure that out. Yeah. Very good. Ms. Torres. Thank you, Chairman. And I just want to encourage you. [1:45:22] Maybe this is a roundtable off camera meeting that we need to have maybe a follow up [1:45:28] with the administrator or the staff. There's so many issues that we want to address. Right now, [1:45:34] I want to talk to you about preempting state laws. Multiple court rulings and Supreme Court precedent [1:45:42] have made it clear that the FAA does not have the authority to overrule the state and local laws. [1:45:49] Congress intentionally did not grant this authority under the FAA reauthorization or other laws. But [1:45:55] despite this, the FAA recently proposed a rule allowing the FAA to overrule and preempt any state and [1:46:03] local meal and rest break laws. Limiting flight crews or flight attendants ability to be well rested. [1:46:12] I was on a flight a week ago from California to DCA. It should have been a five hour flight. It took us [1:46:21] 10 hours to get here. We were over DCA air for 30 minutes. Smart system will help. Yes. Before we ran out of [1:46:29] fuel and when we ran out of fuel, we had to divert to BWI. We couldn't get off the flight there. [1:46:39] For the first time all year, I checked in a bag so I was trapped. I couldn't get off without the bag. [1:46:46] My concern is for the violent interactions that we are seeing more and more between the passengers and [1:46:54] how they abuse some of the flight crew. We need them to be in the best spirits that they can possibly be. [1:47:04] And denying, you know, breaks because it's more efficient or, you know, better for the airline [1:47:12] is certainly not the experience that I want to have. The more patient that these flight attendants could be [1:47:19] with these aggressive passengers, the better off and the safer that we will be. By the way, Ken Calvert [1:47:28] was on that flight with me too. Anyway, what can you do to ensure that we are abiding by the local [1:47:36] state laws rather than preempting them? Well, first of all, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not going to pretend [1:47:43] to be a lawyer. I do believe that if our law team believes this is something that is relevant to [1:47:51] assert our authorities, that's what they're doing. So I have to trust that the legal team actually [1:47:56] knows what they're doing and there's purpose behind it. As far as rest breaks are concerned, we highly [1:48:03] regulate through the FAA the amount of duty rest that's required for the flight crews. So I think we're [1:48:10] concerned when we see state law preempt what our regulatory authorities require. That's where we feel [1:48:16] like we have to throw the flag on that. And if that ultimately requires a court of higher jurisdiction [1:48:22] to arbitrate that dispute, so be it. But we do have the authority to regulate crew duty time limits [1:48:28] and mandatory crew rest. And that's that's what we're protecting. My time expired, but the courts did not [1:48:34] agree with that yet. So we can have a longer conversation on this. I think this is the first time [1:48:39] we've actually asserted our authority. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Torres. Mr. Siskamani. Thank you. [1:48:46] Thank you for this extra opportunity. There was one more thing I wanted to bring up on the [1:48:52] FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. On the bill, it included federal funding for airports to convert from [1:49:00] the AFFF mandated by the FAA to be used by all commercial service airports to F3 and properly disposed [1:49:07] of the PFAS containing forever chemicals. The Tucson Airport Authority has acted in good faith and [1:49:13] converted from the AFFF to F3 foam at a cost well over 600,000 right now. In addition to the airport [1:49:20] purchasing two new Panther fire trucks and replaced the tank of the rapid intervention vehicles. So they [1:49:26] they're doing all that they can on this. Can you provide me some insight on the reimbursement process [1:49:32] of this since they haven't seen it yet of them and the other airports that have complied with the [1:49:38] foam transition and they're still not seeing the reimbursement and when can airports expect [1:49:44] the financial relief from the funds they have expanded to address the environmental concerns? [1:49:48] Yes, that one I can address. While all of the system processing with the airports has been [1:49:56] accomplished, there is no money in the budget to fund reimbursement. So this will have to be a unique [1:50:01] line item that Congress will have to give us budgeting dollars in order to do reimbursement for. [1:50:07] And it's not just your airports, sir. There are hundreds of these airports that require [1:50:13] or are seeking reimbursement for funding. We just don't have any money for it. [1:50:16] What's a ballpark figure of the funding necessary for the reimbursements? [1:50:19] Let me let me go back and get more intelligence before I give you that number. But I'll be happy to [1:50:24] share that with both you and Chairman Womack and Ranking Member Clyburn. [1:50:28] I would be very interested in getting that and advocating for that. It's I know that it's going [1:50:35] to I mean airports have done this expecting to get reimbursed and we should address that immediately. [1:50:41] So thank you. Chairman Womack, you bet. Thank you, Administrator Bedford, for being here today. [1:50:47] We appreciate your time and your testimony. We may have some members that would like to submit some [1:50:52] questions for the record. All we ask is that the agency respond in a timely fashion. Members, [1:50:57] please submit any questions for the record to subcommittee staff within seven days. And with that, [1:51:03] this subcommittee hearing stands adjourned. Thank you.