# Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR47608 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** June 28, 2023 - **Citation:** R47608 ## Text Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress June 28, 2023 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R47608 SUMMARY Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization refers to a periodic process through which Congress develops legislation to renew authorizing statutes as well as revise and update relevant laws governing civil aviation programs and functions primarily carried out by the FAA. In addition to funding and operations of the FAA, some aviation programs administered by other components of the Department of Transportation (DOT) are also considered in the context of FAA reauthorization. The last multiyear FAA reauthorization measure, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254), was enacted in October 2018. It extended civil aviation taxes and fees and FAA program funding authorities through the end of FY2023. Key civil aviation authorizations, including Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF) revenue collections and certain FAA expenditure authorities, will thus expire at the end of FY2023, prompting an FAA reauthorization process to develop and debate authorizing legislation, which has begun during the first session of the 118th Congress. Congress established the AATF in the Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-258) to provide a dedicated source of federal funding for the aviation system in the United States. Since then, the AATF has been the primary funding source for all FAA major accounts that fund federal aviation programs, with the remainder coming from general fund appropriations. Both the authority to collect aviation excise taxes and the authority to spend from the trust fund must be reauthorized periodically by Congress. Besides AATF revenue collections, which cannot continue without reauthorization, grant expenditure authority for federal support of airport improvement projects must also be reauthorized to prevent a halt in airport infrastructure projects. In addition to authorizing revenue collections and setting spending levels, FAA reauthorization acts typically set policy and establish various statutory requirements pertaining to a broad array of pertinent civil aviation issues, including R47608 June 28, 2023 Bart Elias, Coordinator Specialist in Aviation Policy Rachel Y. Tang, Coordinator Analyst in Transportation and Industry Daniel Morgan Specialist in Science and Technology Policy Laura B. Comay Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Richard K. Lattanzio Specialist in Environmental Policy Kelsi Bracmort Specialist in Natural Resources and Energy Policy Martin C. Offutt Analyst in Energy Policy • • airport development and financing; • • air navigation services and air traffic control modernization; • aviation safety, including potential expansion of requirements to implement safety management across the aviation industry; • • airline industry issues, including air service to small communities and airline consumer service; • aviation and the environment, including initiatives to reduce aircraft noise and emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. FAA management and organizational issues, including FAA workforce hiring, retention, and training; the integration of drones, commercial space activities, and new technologies into the national airspace system; the commercial aviation workforce, including the future supply of airline pilots and aviation maintenance workers; and Congressional Research Service Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Contents The Airport and Airway Trust Fund ................................................................................................ 1 Federal Aviation Administration Funding ....................................................................................... 3 Airport Development and Financing ............................................................................................... 5 Airport Improvement Program .................................................................................................. 5 The Federal Share of Airport Improvement Program Matching Funds .............................. 6 Funding Distribution ........................................................................................................... 6 Policy Issues ....................................................................................................................... 6 Airport Resilience and Sustainability Programs ....................................................................... 7 Passenger Facility Charges........................................................................................................ 8 FAA Management and Organizational Issues.................................................................................. 9 Air Traffic Controller Staffing .................................................................................................. 9 FAA Inspector Workforce Training and Resources .................................................................. 11 Air Navigation Services ................................................................................................................. 11 Air Traffic Control Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 12 The Next Generation Air Transportation System .................................................................... 13 Looking Beyond NextGen ...................................................................................................... 14 Aviation Cybersecurity............................................................................................................ 15 Aeronautical Information Systems .......................................................................................... 16 Airspace Integration for Novel Uses ............................................................................................. 17 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Drones) .................................................................................... 17 Advanced Air Mobility ........................................................................................................... 19 Managing Low-Altitude Airspace ........................................................................................... 21 Supersonic Flight .................................................................................................................... 22 Regulation of Commercial Space Activities ........................................................................... 24 Aviation Safety .............................................................................................................................. 25 Safety Management Systems .................................................................................................. 25 Helicopter Operations ............................................................................................................. 27 Aircraft Certification Reforms and Safety Oversight.............................................................. 28 Aviation Spectrum and Signal Interference............................................................................. 31 Airport Surface Movement Safety .......................................................................................... 32 Pilot and Flight Attendant Fatigue .......................................................................................... 34 Aviation Workforce ....................................................................................................................... 35 Airline Pilot Supply and Training ........................................................................................... 35 Airline Pilot Retirement Age ............................................................................................ 37 Future Aviation Workforce Development ............................................................................... 37 Aviation Maintenance Training ............................................................................................... 38 Airline Industry Issues................................................................................................................... 39 Essential Air Service to Small Communities .......................................................................... 41 EAS Funding and Subsidies.............................................................................................. 42 Policy Enforcement and Issues ......................................................................................... 42 Airline Consumer Protection................................................................................................... 42 DOT Notices of Proposed Rulemaking ............................................................................ 43 Unruly Airline Passengers ....................................................................................................... 44 Aviation and the Environment ....................................................................................................... 45 Congressional Research Service Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Aircraft Noise .......................................................................................................................... 45 National Parks and Air Tour Management ........................................................................ 48 FAA Actions Regarding Aircraft Emissions ............................................................................ 50 Carbon Dioxide Emissions Standards and Offsetting Schemes .............................................. 51 Sustainable Aviation Fuels ...................................................................................................... 52 Unleaded Aviation Gasoline .................................................................................................... 53 Electric Aircraft ....................................................................................................................... 54 Hydrogen-Powered Aircraft .................................................................................................... 55 FAA Research and Development ................................................................................................... 55 Tables Table 1. Aviation Taxes and Fees .................................................................................................... 2 Table 2. Airport and Airway Trust Fund Baseline Projections ........................................................ 3 Table 3. Funding Levels for Major FAA Accounts.......................................................................... 4 Contacts Author Information........................................................................................................................ 57 Congressional Research Service Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress eauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) refers to a periodic process through which Congress develops legislation to renew authorizing statutes and revise and update relevant laws governing civil aviation programs and functions primarily carried out by the FAA. Some aviation programs administered by other components of the Department of Transportation (DOT) are also considered in the process of FAA reauthorization. In addition to authorizing revenue collections and setting spending levels, FAA reauthorization acts typically set policy and establish various statutory requirements pertaining to a broad array of pertinent civil aviation issues, including airport development and financing, airspace management and regulations, aviation safety, environmental concerns, and consumer protection. R The last multiyear FAA reauthorization measure, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115254, also referred to hereinafter as the 2018 FAA reauthorization act), was enacted in October 2018 and extended most FAA revenue collection and program funding authorities, including federal grant expenditure authority for airport projects, through the end of FY2023. As a result, Congress would need to enact legislation to reauthorize or extend these authorities before September 30, 2023. The Airport and Airway Trust Fund1 Congress established the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF) in the Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970 (Title II of P.L. 91-258) to provide a dedicated source of federal funding for the aviation system in the United States. Since then, the AATF has been the primary funding source for all major FAA accounts that fund federal aviation programs, with the remainder coming from general fund appropriations. Both the authority to collect aviation excise taxes and to spend from the trust fund must be periodically reauthorized by Congress. Temporary suspension of tax collections also needs congressional authorization, such as the suspension of aviation excise taxes in late March 2020 through the end of calendar year 2020, as authorized by Section 4007 of the CARES Act (P.L. 116-136). AATF revenue comes from a variety of excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system, which includes airline ticket taxes, segment fees, air cargo fees, and fuel taxes paid by commercial airline passengers and general aviation aircraft operators (see Table 1). The trust fund also accrues interest on its cash balance. In addition to excise taxes deposited into the trust fund, the FAA imposes air traffic service fees on flights that transit U.S.-controlled airspace but do not take off from or land in the United States. These overflight fees partially fund the Essential Air Service program.2 Most FAA spending, including most spending from the AATF, requires annual appropriations by Congress. Approximately 20% of the FAA’s total funds are disbursed as contract authority for the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and may be committed prior to annual appropriations.3 The rest may be spent only with a congressional appropriation. 1 See CRS Report R44749, The Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF): An Overview, by Rachel Y. Tang and Bart Elias. 2 See CRS Report R44176, Essential Air Service (EAS), by Rachel Y. Tang. 3 Contract authority is a type of budget authority that allows the federal government to incur an obligation in advance of an appropriation. Liquidating authority is needed eventually to pay off the obligations incurred using contract authority. The annual obligation limitation is analogous to an appropriation. In effect, limitations of obligations restrict the amount of contract authority that may be committed under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Congressional Research Service 1 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Table 1. Aviation Taxes and Fees (CY2023 rates) Tax or Fee Rate Passenger ticket tax (on domestic ticket purchases and frequent flyer awards) 7.5% Flight segment tax (domestic, indexed annually to Consumer Price Index) $4.80 Cargo waybill tax 6.25% Frequent flyer tax 7.5% General aviation gasolinea 19.3 cents/gallon General aviation jet fuela (kerosene) 21.8 cents/gallon Commercial jet fuela (kerosene) 4.3 cents/gallon International departure/arrivals tax (indexed annually to Consumer Price Index) (prorated Alaska/Hawaii to/from mainland United States) $21.10 (Alaska/Hawaii = $10.60) Fractional ownership surtax on general aviation jet fuel 14.1 cents/gallon Source: CRS update using tax rates published in Internal Revenue Service, 26 C.F.R. §601.602: Tax forms and instructions, Rev. Proc. 2022-38. a. Fuel tax rates do not include 0.1 cents/gallon for the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) trust fund. Trust fund revenue can be volatile, as external factors affect demand for air travel. For example, when the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, substantially reduced demand for air travel, trust fund revenues plummeted. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a similar negative effect. The decline in air travel and the suspended aviation tax collection through calendar year 2020 resulted in a sharp decline in FY2020 trust fund revenue to about $8 billion, nearly a 47% decrease from the $15 billion collected in FY2019.4 The aviation trust fund appears to have bounced back from the pandemic-related decreases and is likely to have additional funds to support extra airport capital investment, as projected by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in February 2023 (Table 2). CBO’s May 2023 projections show the trust fund would have over $17 billion in excise tax revenues in FY2023, with an end-of-year cash balance of over $13 billion. At the end of FY2022, the AATF uncommitted balance was down to $229 million, but it is projected to recover to $831 million by the end of FY2023 and further grow to over $13 billion in the next five years. The financial vitality of the trust fund can be evaluated by looking at its uncommitted balance and the cash balance, but there are considerable differences between the two indicators. The FAA considers the committed balance of the trust fund to include the appropriated amounts from the trust fund plus obligated AIP contract authority for the year. The uncommitted balance, which is the revenue that would remain in the trust fund after subtracting the committed balance, is often used to evaluate the FAA’s ability to enter into future commitments as provided in authorization and appropriations acts. With a projected end-of-year FY2028 uncommitted balance of $13 billion, Congress would have around $10 billion above projected baseline spending available for civil aviation spending and still be able to maintain an uncommitted balance of several billion dollars. 4 Congressional Budget Office (CBO), “Budget and Economic Data: 10-year Trust Fund Projections,” at https://www.cbo.gov/data/budget-economic-data. Congressional Research Service 2 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Table 2. Airport and Airway Trust Fund Baseline Projections (dollars in millions) FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 Start-of-Year Balance 12,337 13,013 14,789 16,916 19,296 21,941 Excise Tax Revenues 17,245 18,853 19,690 20,483 21,270 22,047 Interest 256 395 437 419 441 501 Outlays 16,825 17,472 18,000 18,522 19,066 19,588 End-of-Year Balance 13,013 14,789 16,916 19,296 21,941 24,901 Start-of-Year Balance 229 831 2,561 4,698 7,135 9,900 Change in Balance 602 1,730 2,137 2,437 2,765 3,112 End-of-Year Balance 831 2,561 4,698 7,135 9,900 13,012 Cash Balancesa Uncommitted Balances Source: Congressional Budget Office, Baseline Projections: Airport and Airway Trust Fund, May 2023. Notes: a. Trust fund cash balance amounts exclude the effects of general fund appropriations for the Airport Improvement Program. b. The change in uncommitted balances equals excise tax revenues plus transfers and interest minus total spending authority. Federal Aviation Administration Funding FAA funding is divided among four major accounts. Operations and Maintenance (O&M) receives approximately 60% of total FAA appropriations. The O&M account, funded by the trust fund as well as by general fund contributions, principally funds air traffic operations and aviation safety programs. The AIP provides federal grants-in-aid for projects such as new runways and taxiways; runway lengthening, rehabilitation, and repair; and noise mitigation near airports. The Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account provides funding for the acquisition and maintenance of air traffic facilities and equipment and for engineering, development, testing, and evaluation of technologies related to the federal air traffic system. The Research, Engineering, and Development account finances research on improving aviation safety and operational efficiency and reducing environmental impacts of aviation operations. Authorized levels and actual funding for these accounts are shown in Table 3. Aside from the annual funding for FAA accounts Congress addressed the financial impact of the pandemic in three separate laws in 2020 and 2021 that appropriated a total of $20 billion from the general fund to eligible U.S. airports as COVID-19 relief measures.5 These funds were not included in funding 5 The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136, enacted on March 27, 2020), which provided $10 billion as economic relief to eligible airports affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260, enacted on December 27, 2020), which provided $2 billion in economic relief to eligible U.S. airports, including $200 million to operators of eligible airport concessions, such as onairport parking and car rental as well as in-terminal concessions; and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L. 117(continued...) Congressional Research Service 3 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress for the four major accounts in Table 3, as they were not part of the FAA reauthorization or annual FAA appropriations. Table 3. Funding Levels for Major FAA Accounts (dollars in millions) Account FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Authorized Levels 10,247 10,486 10,732 11,000 11,269 11,537 Actual/Enacted Levels 10,212 10,411 10,630 11,002 11,414 11,915 Authorized Levels Additional General Fund Authorization 3,350 3,350 1,020 3,350 1,041 3,350 1,064 3,350 1,087 3,350 1,110 Actual/Enacted Levels 4,350 3,850 3,750 3,750 3,904 3,909 Authorized Levels 3,330 3,398 3,469 3,547 3,624 3,701 Actual/Enacted Levels 3,250 3,000 3,045 3,015 2,893 2,945 Authorized Levels 189 194 199 204 209 214 Actual/Enacted Levels 189 191 193 198 249 255 Authorized Levels 17,116 18,448 18,791 19,165 19,539 19,912 Actual/Enacted Levels 18,000 17,452 17,618 17,965 18,460 19,024 Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Facilities and Equipment (F&E) Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D) Totals Sources: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254); Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), “Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF) Fact Sheet,” July 2022; FAA FY2024 Budget Estimates. Furthermore, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58), enacted on November 15, 2021, appropriated $25 billion from the general fund over a five-year period (FY2022-FY2026) for airport and air traffic control projects. This aviation funding includes $15 billion in grants for airport infrastructure projects that increase safety and expand capacity; $5 billion in competitive grants for airport terminals, including replacing aging terminals and airportowned control towers; and $5 billion to improve the physical condition of FAA air traffic control facilities. The IIJA provides money for aviation projects that previously were not eligible to receive federal funding (e.g., airport terminal projects that have previously been financed with airports’ own funds); this funding did not fall under the existing major FAA accounts, so it was not included in the major accounts’ funding levels. These significant general fund injections, though not permanent, depart from the usual practice of funding civil aviation infrastructure in the United States largely from user taxes and fees. Lawmakers may face decisions related to whether the civil aviation infrastructure and programs 2, enacted on March 11, 2021), which provided $8 billion for eligible airports to cover costs of operations, personnel, and cleaning, including a set-aside for rent relief and other costs of airport concessionaires. Congressional Research Service 4 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress are to be funded predominantly by the trust fund, or if they are also to rely on short-term additions appropriated from the general fund, such as with IIJA funding. Airport Development and Financing6 The federal government supports the development of airport infrastructure in three ways: 1. the AIP provides federal grants to airports for planning and development, mainly of capital projects related to aircraft operations such as runways and taxiways; 2. Congress has authorized airports to assess a local passenger facility charge (PFC) on each boarding passenger, subject to specific federal approval (PFC revenues can be used for a broader range of projects than AIP funds, including landside projects, such as passenger terminals and ground access improvements); and 3. preferential income tax treatment for investors on interest income from bonds issued by state and local governments for airport improvements (subject to compliance with federal rules). Airports may also draw on state and local funds and on operating revenues, such as lease payments and landing fees. Different airports use different combinations of AIP funding, PFCs, tax-exempt bonds, state and local grants, and airport revenues to finance particular projects. Small airports are more likely to be dependent on AIP grants than large or medium-sized airports. Large airports are more likely to issue tax-exempt bonds or finance capital projects with the proceeds of PFCs. Each of these funding sources places various legislative, regulatory, or contractual constraints on the airports that use it. The availability and conditions of one source of funding may also influence the availability and terms of other funding sources. Airport Improvement Program The AIP provides federal grants to airports for airport development and planning. Participants range from large, publicly owned commercial airports to small, general aviation airports that may be privately owned but are available for public use.7 AIP funding is usually limited to construction of improvements related to aircraft operations, such as runways and taxiways (also known as airside projects). Landside projects, including commercial revenue-producing facilities such as parking facilities generally are not eligible for AIP, nor are operating costs.8 The structure of AIP funds distribution reflects congressional priorities and the objectives of assuring airport safety and security, increasing capacity, reducing congestion, helping fund noise and environmental mitigation, and financing small state and community airports. The main financial advantage of the AIP to airports is that as a grant program, it can provide funds for capital projects without the financial burden of debt financing, although airports are required to provide a relatively modest local match to the federal funds. Limitations on the use of 6 See CRS Report R43327, Financing Airport Improvements, by Rachel Y. Tang. 7 General aviation airports do not serve military (with a few Air National Guard exceptions) or scheduled commercial service aircraft but typically do support one or more of the following: business/corporate, personal, instructional flying; agricultural spraying; air ambulances; on-demand air taxies; charter aircraft. 8 For detailed guidance on allowable costs under the AIP, see Chapter 3 of FAA, Airport Improvement Program Handbook, at http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/orders/media/aip_5100_38c.pdf. Congressional Research Service 5 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress AIP grants include the range of projects that the AIP can fund and the requirement that recipients adhere to all program regulations and grant assurances. Federal law requires the Secretary of Transportation to publish a national plan for the development of public-use airports in the United States. This appears as a biannual FAA publication called the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS).9 For an airport to receive AIP funds, it must be listed in the NPIAS. The Federal Share of Airport Improvement Program Matching Funds For AIP-funded projects, the federal government share differs depending on the type of airport.10 The federal share is generally 75% for large and medium airports and 90% for other airports, with some exceptions. Certain economically distressed communities receiving subsidized air service may be eligible for up to a 95% federal share of project costs. This cost-share structure means that smaller airports pay a lower share of AIP-funded project costs than larger airports.11 Funding Distribution The distribution system for AIP grants is complex. It is based on a combination of formula grants (also referred to as apportionments or entitlements) and discretionary funds.12 Each year, the entitlements are first apportioned by formula to specific airports or types of airports. Once the entitlements are satisfied, the remaining funds are defined as discretionary funds. Airports apply for discretionary funds for projects in their airport master plans. Formula grants and discretionary funds are not mutually exclusive in the sense that airports receiving formula funds may also apply for and receive discretionary funds. Grants generally are awarded directly to airports. Policy Issues The airport improvement questions Congress generally faces in the context of FAA reauthorization include the following: • • • Should airport development funding be increased or decreased? How might significant multiyear general fund appropriations, such as IIJA, fit into the overall airport development and finance in the long run? Could the AIP be restructured to address congestion and capacity at the busiest U.S. airports, or should a large share of AIP resources continue to go to noncommercial airports that lack other sources of funding? Should Congress consider setting tighter limits on the purposes for which AIP and PFC funds may be spent? 9 According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 3,287 of the 19,853 airports in the United States are listed in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) report, 2023-2027, at https://www.faa.gov/airports/ planning_capacity/npias/current. 10 The federal government’s share of project costs is statutorily defined in 49 U.S.C. §47109. 11 Higher federal shares are available to airports in states with large amounts of federal land; see 49 U.S.C. §47109(b). 12 See 49 U.S.C. Chapter 471; and FAA, Airport Improvement Program Handbook, at http://www.faa.gov/airports/ resources/publications/orders/media/aip_5100_38D.pdf. Congressional Research Service 6 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Airport Resilience and Sustainability Programs Airport planning and projects related to resilience and sustainability concerns, including emission reduction efforts and energy efficiency and reliability projects, are eligible for federal funding from AIP discretionary funds. Eligible projects under these programs include the following:13 • • • • Voluntary Airport Low Emissions (VALE):14 gate electrification, charging stations for electrical ground support vehicles, geothermal systems, low-emission vehicles, and solar hot water systems. Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV):15 replacement or conversion of on-road vehicles for zero-emission vehicles. Sustainability Planning:16 development of sustainability plans that address environmental and energy planning involving recycling, energy efficiency, renewable energy, water quality, and climate resiliency.17 Energy Efficiency Program:18 energy assessments for heating and cooling, base load, backup power, and power for on-road vehicles and ground support equipment. Typical projects include LED lighting, renewable energy systems, and HVAC upgrades. The FAA also provides discretionary funds for its airport energy supply, redundancy, and microgrids program. This airport program targets improving reliability and efficiency of the power supply, preventing power disruptions, acquiring and installing electrical generators, separating the main power supply, and constructing or modifying facilities to install microgrids. Aside from AIP funds, IIJA funds are available for eligible sustainability planning and aviation projects: • • • $15 billion ($3 billion per year for five years) in airport infrastructure funding can be used for runways, taxiways, safety and sustainability projects, as well as terminal, airport-transit connections, and roadway projects; $5 billion ($1 billion per year for five years) in competitive grants for airport terminal development projects may fund safe, sustainable, and accessible airport terminals, as well as on-airport rail access projects and airport-owned airport traffic control towers (projects may also include multimodal development); and $5 billion ($1 billion per year for five years) to update and improve the physical condition of FAA air traffic control facilities. The FAA announced on April 20, 2023, that it had selected a sustainable design for new air traffic control towers that will be used primarily at municipal and smaller airports. The design 13 For additional information of these programs and eligibility requirements at AIP eligible airports, see FAA, “FY2022 Competitive Funding Opportunity: Airport Improvement Program Supplemental Discretionary Grants,” 87 Federal Register 80248, December 29, 2022, at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-12-29/pdf/2022-28285.pdf. 14 FAA, “Voluntary Airport Low Emissions Program (VALE),” at https://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/vale. 15 FAA, “Airport Zero Emissions Vehicle and Infrastructure Pilot Program,” at https://www.faa.gov/airports/ environmental/zero_emissions_vehicles. 16 FAA, “Airport Sustainability,” at https://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/sustainability. 17 FAA is conducting research to provide airports guidance and assistance on improving airport resilience to climate change and severe weather. For more information, see https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-09/ Airport_Resilience_Factsheet_2022_09.pdf. 18 See Chapter 6, §7 of the Airport Improvement Program Handbook at https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/ aip_handbook/. Congressional Research Service 7 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress incorporates some sustainability elements, such as all-electric building systems and thermally efficient facades.19 Passenger Facility Charges The Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 allowed the Secretary of Transportation to authorize public agencies that control commercial airports to impose a PFC on each paying passenger boarding an aircraft at their airports to supplement their AIP grants.20 The PFC is a state, local, or port authority fee and is not deposited into the U.S. Treasury.21 To impose a PFC above $3, an airport has to show that the funded projects will make significant improvements in air safety, increase competition, or reduce congestion or noise impacts on communities and that these projects could not be fully funded by AIP funds. Unlike AIP grants that fund airside projects, PFC funds may be used to pay for a broader range of “capacity enhancing” projects, including for landside projects such as terminals and transit systems on airport property and for interest payments servicing debt incurred to carry out projects.22 Large and medium hub airports imposing PFCs above the $3 level forgo 75% of their AIP formula funds. Because of the complementary relationship between the AIP and PFCs, PFC provisions are generally folded into FAA reauthorization legislation dealing with the AIP. Initially, there was a $3 cap on each airport’s PFC and a $12 limit on the total PFCs that a passenger could be charged per round trip. The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century of 2000 (P.L. 106-181) raised the PFC ceiling to $4.50, with an $18 limit on the total PFCs that a passenger can be charged per round trip. According to FAA statistics, as of March 2023, 360 airports collect PFCs among which 350 airports charge at the maximum rate of $4.50. PFC collections in 2022 were over $3.32 billion, about the same as the authorized level of AIP funding. 23 The central legislative issue related to PFCs remains whether to raise or eliminate the $4.50 per enplaned passenger ceiling. In general, airports complain about the diminishing purchase power of PFCs and argue for increasing or eliminating the ceiling, whereas most air carriers and some passenger advocates oppose a higher PFC ceiling. The permissible uses of revenues are another ongoing point of contention. Airport operators, in particular, would like more freedom to use PFC funds for off-airport projects, such as transportation access projects, and want the process of obtaining FAA approval to impose PFCs to be streamlined. Carriers, on the other hand, often complain that airports tend to use PFC funds to finance lower-priority projects that may not offer meaningful safety or capacity enhancements. The major air carriers are also unhappy with their limited influence over project decisions, as 19 FAA, “FAA Selects Sustainable Design for New Control Towers at Municipal, Smaller Airports,” at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-selects-sustainable-design-new-control-towers-municipal-smaller-airports. 20 P.L. 101-508, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Title IX. 21 Air carriers collect the passenger facility charges (PFCs) for airports and are paid a small administrative fee. 22 49 U.S.C. §40117. 23 FAA, “Key Passenger Facility Charge Statistics as of March 31, 2023,” at https://www.faa.gov/airports/pfc/ monthlyreports/key-passenger-facility-charge-statistics-31-march-2023. Congressional Research Service 8 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress airports are required, by PFC program guidance and procedures,24 to consult with resident air carriers but do not need to get their agreement on PFC-funded projects.25 FAA Management and Organizational Issues The FAA is a large organization with a staff of about 44,000. More than 31,000 of these employees are in the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), including approximately 14,500 air traffic controllers, 5,000 air traffic supervisors and managers, and 7,800 engineers and maintenance technicians. The ATO was established under Executive Order 13180 (December 7, 2000) as a functional unit within the FAA but with a completely separate management and organizational structure and a mandate to employ a business-like approach emphasizing defined performance goals and metrics related to operational safety and system efficiency. Separate from the ATO, about 7,200 aviation safety inspectors and other staff comprise the Office of Aviation Safety (AVS), which has primary responsibility for the FAA’s safety regulatory and oversight functions. Together, the ATO and AVS comprise the large majority of the FAA workforce. Additionally, other FAA personnel administer contracts and agreements for FAA facilities and equipment, manage the AIP grant program, and are involved in civil aviation research, engineering, and development activities to support the FAA’s operational and safety functions. Key organizational issues for FAA center on the selection, retention, training, and job resources to support its highly skilled workforce of controllers, engineers, technicians, and aviation safety inspectors. Air Traffic Controller Staffing The FAA is presently facing a shortage of fully qualified controllers. The FAA reduced its air traffic controller hiring during the COVID-19 pandemic in response to the significant drop in air traffic volumes.26 Subsequently, the FAA accelerated air traffic controller hiring and training to address air traffic activity that rebounded more quickly than forecast. While the FAA hired about 500 new controllers in FY2021 compared with 920 in FY2020, it increased the number of newly hired controllers to just over 1,000 in FY2022. In FY2023, the FAA plans to hire and train about 1,500 controllers, and it has requested funds to hire and provide initial training to about 1,800 new controllers in FY2024.27 Although the FAA is hiring more controllers and has developed a plan to address a backlog in initial and on-the-job training, the lengthy process to fully certify controllers presents near-term challenges at some air traffic facilities. The issue is most prevalent at larger, more complex facilities with lengthy on-the-job training requirements. The New York City area Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facility, in particular, currently does not have sufficient numbers of fully certified air traffic controllers, known as Certified Professional Controllers (CPCs) by FAA standards. Controllers do not attain CPC status until they demonstrate operational proficiency at all positions within a facility. For large facilities with a large number of positions and complex airspace and air traffic patterns, such as the New 24 See FAA Order 5500.1, Passenger Facility Charge, at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/ index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/12947. 25 Airlines for America, “A4A Statement for the Record Opposing Airport Tax Hikes on Travelers,” March 26, 2019, at https://www.airlines.org/news/a4a-statement-for-the-record-opposing-airport-tax-hikes-on-travelers/; Travel Weekly, “PFC redux: Airport and airlines lobbyists resume the fight,” March 26, 2019, at https://www.travelweekly.com/ Travel-News/Airline-News/PFC-redux. 26 FAA, The Air Traffic Controller Workforce Plan, 2023-2032, at https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ headquarters_offices/afn/offices/finance/offices/office-financial-labor-analysis/plans/controller-workforce. 27 Ibid.; U.S. Department of Transportation, Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2024, Federal Aviation Administration, at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2023-03/FAA_FY_2024_President_Budget_508.pdf. Congressional Research Service 9 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress York TRACON, the on-the-job training process to attain CPC qualification is lengthy. Controllers in this on-the-job training phase are known as “developmentals.” The FAA strives to keep the percentage of developmentals at or below 35%; system wide, it currently stands at 21%-22%.28 However, the FAA has reported that developmentals make up about 46% of the controller workforce at the New York TRACON.29 The FAA warns that this situation will reduce efficiency and result in delays.30 Backlogs in hiring and training due to the COVID-19 pandemic have exacerbated this situation, according to the FAA. One stopgap measure to address this situation is that the FAA offers incentives to controllers to relocate to facilities with acute staffing needs. The FAA has frequently used such incentives to address staffing needs in understaffed air traffic facilities. However, transferring CPCs would need to familiarize themselves with all the positions in the facility they transfer into and are considered “in training” (CPC-IT) until they do so (although they usually can complete this training phase faster than developmentals). The FAA has issued a notice relaxing requirements for airlines to utilize their slot allocations at the New York area airports and at Washington Reagan National Airport during the summer months of 2023, in hopes that airlines will reduce schedules at these locations to avoid delays.31 However, airlines are forecasting high travel demand for the summer of 2023, which may make it unlikely that they would voluntarily reduce schedules and may instead increase flight operations, potentially placing additional strain on air traffic control operations at New York and Washington area facilities. The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-190) required the FAA to give hiring preference to veterans with aviation experience, applicants with prior experience at Department of Defense (DOD) air traffic facilities, and graduates of controller training programs endorsed by the FAA under its Collegiate Training Initiative (CTI). Provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (P.L. 116-92) modified these requirements to broaden the criteria for eligibility for additional applicants with military backgrounds. It also required the FAA to track applicants given hiring preference separately from applicants that respond to public announcements for air traffic controller jobs and to assess attrition rates for both groups and the costs to hire and train air traffic controllers. Initial findings from 2020 found that both preferred applicants and applicants selected from broad hiring announcements had high success rates for completing basic training at the FAA Academy and similar attrition rates of around 2%.32 In 2021, while attrition rates remained similar for both groups, they increased considerably to about 20%.33 The FAA did not provide analysis or explanation for the increase, but that level of attrition could present challenges for maintaining future air traffic controller staffing levels. According to the FAA, the per student cost for the air traffic basics training at the FAA Academy is about $7,500, while initial qualification costs roughly $83,000 per controller for terminal facilities and $122,000 per controller at en route facilities.34 En route facilities 28 FAA, The Air Traffic Controller Workforce Plan, 2022-2031, at https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ headquarters_offices/afn/offices/finance/offices/office-financial-labor-analysis/plans/controller-workforce. 29 FAA, “Staffing Related Relief Concerning Operations at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, LaGuardia Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport, May 15, 2023, Through September 15, 2023,” 88 Federal Register 18032-18034, March 27, 2023. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 FAA, Report to Congress: Air Traffic Controller Hiring Reform, June 9, 2021, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/ files/2021-11/FY20_NDAA_Section_1134_Air_Traffic_Control_Hiring_Reform.pdf. 33 FAA, Report to Congress: Air Traffic Controller Hiring Reform, February 8, 2022, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/ faa.gov/files/2022-02/PL_116-92_Sec_1134_Air_Traffic_Control_Hiring_Reform.pdf. 34 Ibid. Congressional Research Service 10 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress encompass larger, more complex facilities that handle larger volumes of airspace encompassing both low-altitude and high-altitude aircraft flying between origins and destinations. It generally takes longer and costs more to train controllers at such facilities compared to most TRACONs that strictly handle airport arrivals and departures. However, among TRACONS, more complex facilities whose coverage includes larger geographic areas and busy airports—like the New York TRACON, the Potomac Consolidated TRACON in the Washington, DC area, and the Southern California and Northern California TRACONs on the west coast—require extensive training for controllers that is more similar to en route facilities in terms of training costs and the time needed to meet initial qualification standards. FAA Inspector Workforce Training and Resources The FAA also faces ongoing challenges in recruiting, retaining, and training its workforce of aviation safety inspectors that oversee airlines, other aircraft operators (including unmanned aircraft operators), repair stations, pilots and other safety critical personnel, and aviation manufacturers. These functions are carried out by the FAA’s Office of Aviation Safety (AVS), which has a staff of about 7,200 safety inspectors, technicians, and support staff. Over 4,000 of these staff are aviation safety inspectors, and an additional 2,500 are considered safety-critical or safety-technical positions. The FAA is required to submit annual aviation safety workforce plans. Its most recent plan points to hiring, retention, and training challenges for the FAA’s aviation safety workforce. The AVS workforce is somewhat older than other FAA components: the average age at hire among AVS employees is 46, and the current average employee age is 55.35 There is no mandatory retirement age for aviation safety inspectors, and attrition among AVS staff has been historically low, averaging roughly 4%-5% annually. Nonetheless, the FAA anticipates that the AVS workforce would need to grow by about 13%-14% over the next decade to keep pace with expansion of the civil aviation industry and the increasing complexity of aviation technologies. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) mandated that the FAA develop a workforce training strategy for its safety workforce. Since 2021, the FAA’s aviation safety workforce plan has included strategic objectives driving workforce skill needs and a strategy for effective use of resources. Resources primarily are focused on various capabilities to improve risk-based analysis and decisionmaking to prioritize and make the most efficient use of limited human capital and available resources. The FAA’s strategic objectives include improving aerospace safety; setting a “gold standard” of safety by excelling domestically to influence globally; excelling operationally by improving the effectiveness, efficiency, and standardization of safety management; and focusing on people to improve hiring, retention, and training opportunities.36 Air Navigation Services The term air navigation services refers broadly to air traffic services, including surveillance and separation of aircraft and safe management of the airspace, as well as aviation weather and aeronautical information services provided to users of the airspace. The FAA is the largest air navigation service provider in the world. In addition to its responsibilities for operating the national airspace system within the United States, the FAA is engaged in numerous initiatives to modernize the facilities, equipment, and technologies that it relies on to carry out this mission, 35 FAA, Aviation Safety Workforce Plan, FY2023-FY2032, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/ 2023_Aviation_Safety_Workforce_Plan_0.pdf. 36 Ibid. Congressional Research Service 11 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress including through the use of annual facilities and equipment appropriations and through additional IIJA funds designated for modernization of FAA facilities and infrastructure. Air Traffic Control Infrastructure The airspace overlying the United States and the overwater areas for which the FAA has operational responsibility is the busiest in the world. On a typical day, the FAA handles about 45,000 flights. The FAA operates 139 stand-alone air traffic control towers at airports, mostly at large airports. Another 262 towers, located at small airports that primarily serve general aviation aircraft, are operated by contractors under the FAA federal contract tower (FCT) program. At 124 mostly mid-sized airports, the FAA operates combined tower and TRACON facilities that provide radar guidance and separation to arriving and departing aircraft as well as tower control of runway and taxiway surface movement operations. In 25 larger regions—such as the airspace around New York City, Washington, DC, and Southern California—the FAA has consolidated radar surveillance at stand-alone consolidated TRACON facilities. En route traffic control and radar surveillance outside of areas covered by the TRACONs are handled by the FAA’s 25 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCCs) and combined control facilities.37 The age and condition of these facilities vary significantly. Some are relatively new, but other towers and radar facilities are several decades old, with some more than 70 years old. A portion of the FAA’s F&E account funds upkeep, rehabilitation, and replacement of these facilities. In addition, the IIJA included funding of $5 billion—$1 billion each fiscal year from FY2022 through FY2026—to improve the FAA’s air traffic facilities. The FAA is using this funding to renovate and replace towers and radar control facilities; update power systems; overhaul and replace radar equipment sites; improve sustainability of navigation, weather, and tracking equipment; and enhance facility security.38 In addition to its network of surveillance radars to provide aircraft tracking capabilities to the FAA’s TRACONS, ARTCCs, and combined control facilities, the FAA maintains an elaborate network of navigational aids (NAVAIDS), primarily ground-based radio beacons used by aircraft for guidance. While the FAA is transitioning to satellite-based navigation and tracking, it currently maintains over 12,000 NAVAIDS, primarily very high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR) transmitters, used for both en route navigation and non-precision instrument approaches, and instrument landing systems (ILSs), used for precision approach guidance to selected runways, especially at commercial service airports. Some of this ground-based infrastructure will be decommissioned in the coming years as the FAA transitions to the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), but some will remain operational to provide for backup navigational and surveillance capabilities. A minimum operational network of VORs will be retained, primarily as a backup for aerial navigation, as aircraft switch over to using Global Positioning System (GPS) capabilities as the primary means for navigation. While existing ILS systems will likely remain in place at larger airports for years to come, costly investments in new ILS installations, particularly at smaller airports, have largely halted, as new NextGen procedures using GPS with vertical guidance can offer similar capabilities to appropriately equipped aircraft.39 37 FAA, Air Traffic by The Numbers, at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/by_the_numbers/media/ Air_Traffic_by_the_Numbers_2023.pdf. 38 See FAA, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law—Air Traffic Facilities,” at https://www.faa.gov/bil/air-traffic-facilities. 39 Fred Simonds, “ILS on the Block,” IFR, January 29, 2020, at https://www.ifr-magazine.com/charts-plates/ils-on-theblock/. Congressional Research Service 12 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress The Next Generation Air Transportation System NextGen is a multifaceted program to modernize and improve the efficiency of the national airspace system, primarily by migrating from a system using ground-based navigation infrastructure and radar tracking of flights to satellite-based navigation and aircraft tracking. Funding for NextGen programs totals almost $1 billion annually, primarily derived from the FAA’s F&E account. NextGen is currently transitioning from development and deployment of new technologies and procedures to the full-scale operational utilization of the system’s various components. The FAA anticipates that most NextGen capabilities will be fully operational by about 2030.40 Core components of the NextGen system include • • • • • • • • Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS-B), a system for broadcasting and receiving aircraft identification, position, altitude, heading, and speed data derived from on-board navigation systems, primarily GPS receivers. Performance Based Navigation (PBN), navigation using GPS and precision avionics to allow aircraft to fly more efficient routes and arrival and departure paths that improve airspace utilization, potentially allowing for reductions in flight delays and aircraft fuel consumption. System Wide Information Management (SWIM), a data network for sharing real-time operational information, including flight plans, weather, airport conditions, and temporary airspace restrictions across the entire airspace system. Decision Support System (DSS) Automation, a suite of automation and decision-support tools designed to improve aircraft flow management (including traffic flow management, time-based flow management, and terminal flight data management tools that share real-time data among controllers, aircraft operators, and airports to improve strategic traffic flow), airspace utilization, airport arrival and departure efficiency, and airport surface operations. Data Communications (DataComm), a digital voice and data network for communications between aircraft and air traffic control. National Airspace System Voice System (NVS), a standardized digital voice network for communications within and between FAA air traffic facilities that is to replace aging analog equipment. NextGen Weather, an integrated platform for providing a common weather picture to air traffic controllers, air traffic managers, and system users. Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO), an air traffic concept for strategic planning, management, and optimization of flights by continuous monitoring of predicted flight trajectories throughout the national airspace system using integrated data from the NextGen capabilities described above. Many of these NextGen capabilities are already operational. Most airlines and many business jet operators are equipped with performance-based navigation capabilities allowing them to fly more efficient routes and airport arrival and departure paths. The network of ADS-B ground receivers linking these ADS-B feeds to air traffic facilities across the country was completed in October 2019, and ADS-B Out (transmission) functionality is now mandatory for most aircraft being operated in controlled airspace, including airspace above 18,000 feet and airspace in busy 40 FAA, “Forming NextGen: From Vision to Reality,” at https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/background/forming. Congressional Research Service 13 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress metropolitan regions near commercial service airports. Airlines have invested in cockpit technologies compatible with FAA DataComm systems, which are now being deployed to several commercial service airport towers.41 While the FAA has focused on developing a ground-based network of ADS-B receivers to serve as the backbone for NextGen air traffic surveillance capabilities, other air navigation service providers, led by NAV CANADA, have partnered with satellite communications company Iridium to deploy space-based ADS-B (SBA), being marketed under an Iridium subsidiary called Aireon. The Aireon system relies on a linked network of 66 Iridium satellites to receive ADS-B data from aircraft and relay that data to air navigation service providers in near real-time.42 The FAA is evaluating SBA for potential application in oceanic and offshore airspace and for other possible use cases, such as search and rescue, accident investigation, and environmental impact analyses.43 Looking Beyond NextGen The FAA refers broadly to the end-state of NextGen implementation as a system of trajectorybased operations (TBO), an air traffic management concept that achieves efficient strategic planning of aircraft flows and airspace utilization through comprehensive analysis of projected flight plan trajectories through space and time. TBO operations will rely on detailed and accurate portrayals of four-dimensional (4D) trajectories of flights, showing how aircraft will traverse though the airspace in three spatial dimensions (latitude, longitude, and altitude) over time (the fourth dimension). The FAA asserts that TBO will allow for enhanced predictability and reliability and reduced uncertainty about airspace operations. This is expected to allow for improved strategic planning and better alignment of strategic plans and tactical actions to manage and control airspace operations on a system-wide basis. From a user perspective this is expected to improve flight scheduling and routing, resulting in fewer delays and reduced fuel burn and emissions.44 As previously noted, the FAA anticipates that full functionality of NextGen components will be operational by about 2030, thus enabling baseline TBO operational capabilities. Moving beyond NextGen, the FAA envisions a future national airspace system that will rely on a comprehensive and collaborative framework for information sharing and data analytics to manage and control flight operations in the national airspace system. The FAA is calling this future concept the Info-Centric National Airspace System (ICN). According to the FAA, the ICN will expand upon the core concepts of TBO to increase the performance, efficiency, and safety of airspace operations for traditional flight operations and for new airspace users, including unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), advanced air mobility (AAM) vehicles, and commercial space launch and recovery operations. The agency anticipates that initial capabilities of the ICN will be functional by about 2035. 41 FAA, “Data Communications (Data Comm),” at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/data-communications-data-comm-0. 42 Aireon, “About Aireon,” at https://aireon.com/company/; NAV CANADA, “Leveraging ADS-B Surveillance to Optimize Airspace and Enhance Safety and Traffic Flow,” at https://www.navcanada.ca/en/air-traffic/space-based-adsb.aspx. 43 FAA, “ADS-B Advanced Surveillance Enhanced Procedural Separation (ASEPS),” at https://www.faa.gov/ air_traffic/technology/adsb/atc/aseps. 44 See FAA, FACTSHEET: Multi Regional Trajectory Based Operations, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/ FactSheet-MR-TBO.pdf. Congressional Research Service 14 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress The FAA envisions three key pillars for the development and implementation of ICN: (1) operations, (2) supporting infrastructure, and (3) integrated safety management.45 Operations will include initiatives to implement TBO across multiple airspace regions; manage operations in high-altitude airspace (above 60,000 feet); manage UAS operations in low-altitude airspace (generally below 400 feet); and integrate AAM operations and vehicles, particularly in airspace above urban regions. Supporting infrastructure will include further evolution of automation and decisionmaking tools for air traffic management; connected aircraft concepts to facilitate data exchange between aircraft, flight operations centers, and air traffic management systems; enhancements to the SWIM architecture and cloud-based services for data exchange; support for information exchange using mobile applications; and updates and enhancements to information management systems. Integrated safety management will establish bespoke safety assurance tailored to specific operational characteristics by utilizing big data capabilities to continuously monitor, model, and assess risks in real-time. Aviation Cybersecurity The shift from stand-alone navigation equipment, radar tracking, and analog two-way radios to highly integrated and interdependent computers and networks, both onboard aircraft and in air traffic control facilities, creates inherent cybersecurity vulnerabilities. The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-190) directed the FAA to develop a comprehensive strategic framework to reduce cybersecurity risks to aviation and to establish a cybersecurity research and development plan for the national airspace system.46 The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) directed the FAA to address cybersecurity in avionics and software systems through its aircraft certification process and assure that flight guidance and control systems are secured from potential hacking through in-flight entertainment systems. In response, the FAA developed the National Airspace (NAS) System Cyber Engineering Facility and NAS Cyber Monitoring System to assess cyber threats and vulnerabilities and conduct cyber testing and evaluation.47 It is also collaborating with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the DOD on a strategic framework for civil aviation cybersecurity.48 The act also directed the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study assessing the FAA’s cybersecurity workforce. That study found that growing connectivity of FAA systems and aviation digital infrastructure, coupled with a future wave of retirements among the FAA’s cybersecurity workforce and a tight labor market for cybersecurity jobs, pose unique challenges to the FAA.49 The academies’ report concluded that the FAA’s current recruitment capabilities are insufficient to meet future demand. It also identified a number of key opportunities for recruitment through collaborating with educational institutions and industry, leveraging federal hiring flexibilities, and offering opportunities to train and reskill current FAA employees to take on cybersecurity roles. Separately, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has established specific cybersecurity requirements for commercial passenger airports required to have a security program; these requirements went into effect at the beginning of calendar year 2022. The TSA directives mandate that each covered airport designate a cybersecurity coordinator, complete a 45 See FAA, “Pillars of Info-Centric NAS,” at https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ang/icn/ pillars. 46 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs a More Comprehensive Approach to Address Cybersecurity As Agency Transitions to NextGen, April 2015. 47 See FAA, “Cybersecurity Testing,” at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/cas/ct/. 48 See FAA, “Aviation Cyber Initiative (ACI),” at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/cas/aci/. 49 The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Looking Ahead at the Cybersecurity Workforce at the Federal Aviation Administration (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press), 2021. Congressional Research Service 15 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress cybersecurity vulnerability assessment, develop a cybersecurity incident response plan, and report all cybersecurity incidents to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructures Security Agency (CISA) within 24 hours.50 These security mandates mimic those TSA imposed for other transportation modes, such as pipelines. Aeronautical Information Systems Aeronautical Information Systems refer to information technology systems used to disseminate flight safety information, including information regarding airport and airspace conditions, temporary flight restrictions, and other potential hazards, to airspace users. The FAA is engaged in a multiyear effort to modernize the backbone of the underlying information technology architecture, with a primary focus on upgrading the Notices to Air Missions (NOTAM) system to replace what the agency has described as “failing ‘vintage’ hardware and software modules” with a single consolidated notification platform.51 The FAA anticipates that a significant portion of this work will be completed by mid-2025.52 The NOTAM system suffered a temporary failure in January 2023 that resulted in significant flight disruptions, cancellations, and delays for several hours.53 This disruption prompted considerable public and congressional scrutiny, including congressional committee hearings to investigate the matter.54 In addition to concerns over the need to modernize the underlying architecture of information technology systems and infrastructure, the NOTAM system has been criticized for being arcane and difficult to use and interpret. A July 2017 near accident at San Francisco International Airport, attributed in part to the obscurity of NOTAM information about a closed runway, prompted the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to recommend more effective ways to present safety-critical information.55 The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has since launched a global campaign to overhaul NOTAM system standards.56 The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254, §394) required the FAA to continue developing and modernizing the NOTAM repository in a central location and to provide a webbased, searchable archive of all NOTAMs. This built upon the requirements of the 2012 Pilot’s Bill of Rights Act (P.L. 112-153), which directed the FAA to convene a stakeholder NOTAM improvement panel and initiate a NOTAM improvement program with the goals of better 50 Alan Suderman, “TSA Requires Rail and Airports to Strengthen Cybersecurity,” Federal News Network, December 2, 2021, at https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-news/2021/12/tsa-requires-rail-and-airports-to-strengthencybersecurity/. 51 U.S. Department of Transportation, Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2023: Federal Aviation Administration, Facilities and Equipment, p. 247, at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-04/ FAA_Budget_Estimates_FY2023.pdf. 52 Statement of Billy Nolen, Acting Administrator Federal Aviation Administration, in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Notice To Air Missions System, hearings, 118th Cong., 1st sess., February 15, 2023, at https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/22C7E3AC-3EEF-47EE-9DD6B8A8FB5E826C. 53 See CRS Insight IN12078, Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Troubled NOTAM System Has Been on Congress’s Radar for Years, by Bart Elias. 54 See especially U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science And Transportation, Hearing: The Federal Aviation Administration’s NOTAM System Failure and its Impacts on a Resilient National Airspace, 118th Cong., 1st sess., February 15, 2023, at https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2023/2/the-federal-aviation-administration-s-notamsystem-failure-and-its-impacts-on-a-resilient-national-airspace. 55 National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Taxiway Overflight Air Canada Flight 759 Airbus A320-211, CFKCK, at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA17IA148.aspx. 56 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Global campaign on NOTAM improvement (NOTAM2021), at https://www.icao.int/airnavigation/information-management/Pages/GlobalNOTAMcampaign.aspx. Congressional Research Service 16 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress tailoring NOTAM dissemination to specific flight plans, providing data in a format that is more usable and easier to search, and creating a publicly accessible archive. The NOTAM Improvement Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-4), enacted on June 3, 2023, requires the FAA to establish a task force to review existing methods of disseminating NOTAMs and flight operations information to pilots (as well as corresponding regulations, policies, and practices) and develop a report providing recommendations to improve the presentation of NOTAMs, including how to address specific NTSB recommendations. Similar legislation has been considered in prior Congresses. Airspace Integration for Novel Uses Airspace management and air traffic services are anticipated to face demands from a number of new and novel uses, including operations of unmanned aircraft and the continued expansion of commercial space activities. Moreover, the introduction of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) concepts for transporting people and goods by air over relatively short distances and providing other aviation services using novel vehicles with features including electric propulsion and vertical takeoff and landing capabilities is anticipated to place new demands on airspace management. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Drones) The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-95) directed the FAA to develop a plan to integrate UAS, also known as drones, into the national airspace system. In the decade since, drone operations have proliferated with over 600,000 commercial drones and about 1.4 million recreational drones and model aircraft registered with the FAA as of FY2021.57 The FAA anticipates that the number of drones operating in U.S. airspace will continue to grow over the next few years, with the commercial fleet expanding to about 800,000-900,000 drones by FY2026.58 To put this into perspective, there are a little over 200,000 general aviation and air taxi aircraft and about 5,000 airliners currently registered in the United States.59 In June 2016, the FAA published a final rule allowing routine commercial operation of certain small unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds.60 In order to fly for commercial purposes, operators must obtain a remote pilot certification from the FAA. Flights must stay below 400 feet, and speeds must be kept below 100 miles per hour. Flights are generally limited to daylight hours in good visibility, and the drone must be kept within sight of the operator and cannot be flown over people. The regulations provide a mechanism for commercial entities to obtain waivers from these restrictions on a case-by-case basis. In January 2021, the FAA issued updated regulations allowing for routine operations of UAS over people and at night under certain conditions. To fly at night requires additional remote pilot training and the installation of anti-collision lights that are visible for at least three miles, and flights over people are limited to small UAS assessed to pose a minimal risk of injury.61 57 FAA, FAA Aerospace Forecast, Fiscal Years 2022-2042, at https://www.faa.gov/dataresearch/aviation/faa- aerospace-forecast-fy-2022-2042. 58 Ibid. 59 FAA, FAA Aerospace Forecast, FY2022-2042, at https://www.faa.gov/dataresearch/aviation/faa-aerospace-forecastfy-2022-2042. 60 See 14 C.F.R. Part 107. 61 FAA, “Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems over People,” 86 Federal Register 4314-4387, January 15, 2021. Congressional Research Service 17 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Future expansion of commercial applications for unmanned aircraft may hinge on further regulatory action allowing for routine operations beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS), during night and day and in poor visibility, as well as permitting operations in which multiple drones may be monitored and controlled by a single operator. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) directed the FAA to authorize package and cargo delivery with small UAS and implement a plan for managing drone traffic in low-altitude airspace. The FAA has issued a limited number of drone operator certificates under existing charter flight regulations to carry out drone delivery demonstration projects. In September 2020, the FAA issued an updated policy allowing for “type certification” of UAS as a special class of aircraft without occupants.62 The FAA has been working with industry over the past five years to explore advanced UAS operations and the appropriate roles of federal, state, local, and tribal governments and private sector entities in integrating UAS into the national airspace system, with a particular focus on enabling BVLOS operations. In 2017, the FAA launched the Integrated Pilot Program (IPP) to test and evaluate integration of advanced UAS operations in the national airspace. The IPP program concluded in October 2020 but was followed by the BEYOND program, which continues to operate with eight of the nine IPP participants. The BEYOND program is focusing on advanced UAS operations, including BVLOS, as well as the roles of national, local, state, and tribal interests and security and privacy risks of UAS operations.63 The FAA convened a BVLOS aviation rulemaking committee to study the challenges of BVLOS operations and make recommendations to the agency regarding the regulation of BVLOS operations. The committee completed its final report to the FAA in March 2022.64 The report covers aspects of risk mitigation; operating rules, including detect and avoid capabilities and requirements; and right-of-way rules for low-altitude airspace. A special category of BVLOS operations, referred to as shielded BVLOS operations, involve drone flights that remain within 100 feet of a building or other obstacle that poses a hazard to air navigation. Examples might include building or tower inspections where constant visual contact with the drone cannot be maintained. Since crewed aircraft must remain well clear of these obstacles to avoid potential collisions, drone operations in close proximity to them are not likely to conflict with crewed aircraft operations and are thus considered shielded. The FAA is sponsoring research to help inform regulatory decisions about both shielded BVLOS operations and BVLOS operations in low-altitude airspace. In January 2021, the FAA also issued regulations requiring all UAS to broadcast remote identification data to assist in tracking and airspace management.65 Existing UAS not manufactured with remote identification capabilities will be required to retrofit with remote identification broadcast modules or will be limited to operations within FAA-recognized identification areas. Under the FAA’s implementation plan, a network of approved remote identification service suppliers will track location and identification information transmitted from drones and provide UAS traffic management services to drone operators. The fee structure for such services is yet to be determined. The majority of operations conducted under these programs have been focused on package delivery. The second predominant focus of operations under these 62 FAA, “Type Certification of Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems,” 85 Federal Register 58251-58255, September 18, 2020. Type certification refers to a regulatory process for approving the airworthiness of a specific aircraft design or “type.” Elements of type certification include design reviews and engineering and flight testing of aircraft prototypes. 63 FAA, “BEYOND,” at https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/beyond. 64 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line of Sight Aviation Rulemaking Committee, Final Report, March 10, 2022, at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/ UAS_BVLOS_ARC_FINAL_REPORT_03102022.pdf. 65 FAA, “Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft,” 86 Federal Register 4390-4513, January 15, 2021. Congressional Research Service 18 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress programs has been on infrastructure inspection, including both linear infrastructure, such as railroads, pipelines, and highways, as well as nonlinear infrastructure, such as bridges, electric power facilities, chemical plants, wastewater treatment facilities, and other critical infrastructure sites.66 Regulations governing operations of small commercial unmanned aircraft do not apply to drones and remote-controlled aircraft operated strictly for hobby or recreation. The FAA has established statutorily mandated requirements for testing recreational users’ knowledge of airspace and safety regulations,67 and flights must generally stay below 400 feet and keep clear of manned aircraft. Operators of model aircraft and commercial drones must register with the FAA and can do so through an online registration system. U.S. law provides for specific civil and criminal penalties for operators of drones that interfere with wildfire suppression and related law enforcement or other emergency response activities and for individuals that equip unmanned aircraft with dangerous weapons. The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-190) directed the FAA to set procedures for imposing unmanned aircraft restrictions around critical infrastructure and other sensitive facilities, including amusement parks. The FAA has not yet issued regulations to implement this requirement. Congress has taken a particular interest in technologies to detect and interdict hostile or errant drones. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 required the FAA to establish a pilot program to assess the use of drone detection and identification technologies. That program is ongoing. The act also authorized the Department of Justice (DOJ) and DHS, including the Coast Guard, to interdict hostile or unauthorized drones in certain instances to protect critical infrastructure sites and high-profile events. Similar authority was granted to DOD and the Department of Energy (DOE) in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-328) to protect nuclear energy and nuclear weapons facilities. In contrast to those authorities, which do not expire, the authorities granted to DOJ and DHS were set to expire in October 2022 but were extended through appropriations language until the end of FY2023 (see P.L. 117-328, Section 547). Therefore, options to renew or potentially expand these authorities may arise in the context of FAA reauthorization. Advanced Air Mobility AAM refers to a novel transportation system for flying passengers and cargo, typically over relatively short distances ranging from about 10 miles up to roughly 150 miles, using advanced aircraft technologies, principally electric aircraft and aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing capabilities. Future AAM aircraft are envisioned to operate similarly to remotely operated or highly autonomous drones, although flights will be piloted initially. The future introduction of AAM concepts using small electric-powered vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft poses unique challenges to address the regulation and management of low-altitude airspace, flight procedures, infrastructure needs, and related policy issues. The AAM concept was introduced in 2016 with visions of an on-demand urban air transportation system operating eVTOL aircraft using a network of vertiports (VTOL hubs with multiple VTOL pads and charging infrastructure) and smaller single-pad sites (referred to as vertistops) located in 66 FAA, FAA Aerospace Forecast, Fiscal Years 2022-2042, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-06/ Unmanned_Aircraft_Systems.pdf. 67 For more information, see FAA, “The Recreational UAS Safety Test (TRUST),” at https://www.faa.gov/uas/ recreational_flyers/knowledge_test_updates. Congressional Research Service 19 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress urban and suburban settings.68 The use cases for eVTOL aircraft have since expanded to include regional passenger operations to and from small airports; air cargo deliveries; public service operations, including police, fire, and medical services; agricultural operations, such as crop dusting; and private and recreational flights.69 A number of companies are engaged in research and development of marketable passengercarrying AAM vehicles capable of carrying from two to about eight people. However, the unique characteristics of AAM aircraft, including vertical takeoff and landing configurations, electric propulsion, and advanced automation systems, present new challenges for aircraft certification. As a consequence, the FAA is requiring developers to address special conditions to demonstrate vehicle safety and airworthiness before final aircraft type certification approval is made.70 Currently, no AAM vehicles have been certified by the FAA, but a few are progressing through the required steps to obtain certification. In December 2022, the FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to permit air carrier operations using powered-lift aircraft capable of vertical takeoffs and landings and low-speed flight to allow for passenger and cargo carrying operations using certified eVTOL aircraft in the future.71 There are a number of complex technical challenges related to operational safety and efficiency and the development of ground infrastructure to support AAM operations and electric aircraft. In September 2022, the FAA issued an engineering brief providing initial guidance on the design of vertiports to support operations using eVTOL aircraft.72 Additionally, the future introduction of AAM technologies raises a number of policy issues, including potential landowner rights to lowaltitude airspace over their properties, noise and privacy concerns, and the appropriate role of federal, state, and local governments and private industry stakeholders in accessing, regulating, and managing airspace and flight operations. Congress has expressed support for promoting and fostering AAM concepts and addressing policy issues regarding this emerging technology. The Advanced Air Mobility Coordination and Leadership Act (P.L. 117-203) mandated the establishment of a federal working group to develop a national strategy for AAM. It also required a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study assessing the interests, roles, and responsibilities of federal, state, local, and tribal governments regarding AAM aircraft and operations. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (P.L. 116260) had also mandated a GAO study of AAM workforce needs and stakeholder views on implementing AAM operations. That GAO report identified a number of key issues to be addressed before AAM can be widely implemented, addressing the design and certification of AAM vehicles, fostering public acceptance of AAM operations, and developing new ground infrastructure to support AAM operations.73 Moreover, it identified potential challenges in developing a skilled AAM workforce and postulated that the timeline for certifying AAM aircraft and commencing operations is highly 68 Uber Elevate, Fast-Forwarding to a Future of On-Demand Urban Air Transportation, October 27, 2016, at https://evtol.news/__media/PDFs/UberElevateWhitePaperOct2016.pdf. 69 FAA, Urban Air Mobility and Advanced Air Mobility, at https://www.faa.gov/uas/advanced_operations/ urban_air_mobility. 70 FAA, Advanced Air Mobility | Air Taxis, at https://www.faa.gov/air-taxis. 71 FAA, “Update to Air Carrier Definitions,” 87 Federal Register 74995-75019, December 7, 2022. 72 FAA, Engineering Brief #105: Vertiport Design, at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/eb-105-vertiports.pdf. 73 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Transforming Aviation: Stakeholders Identified Issues to Address for ‘Advanced Air Mobility’, GAO-22-105020, May 2022, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-105020.pdf. Congressional Research Service 20 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress uncertain and will depend on extensive FAA and industry collaboration on future actions to address unresolved issues. A provision in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (see Division Q, Section 101 of P.L. 117-328) requires DOT to establish a pilot program to provide grants for developing comprehensive infrastructure plans to facilitate AAM operations. The act authorized $12.5 million per year for FY2023 and FY2024 for the program. Individual grants may not exceed $1 million. The DOT was instructed to seek geographical, operational, and project diversity and to prioritize awards to entities working with commercial AAM developers, universities, and research institutions, as well as other relevant stakeholders. At least 20% of the awards are to be used for projects related to infrastructure located in a rural area. Managing Low-Altitude Airspace Routine operations of small UAS are generally relegated to altitudes at and below 400 feet above the ground. Restricting drones to these lower altitudes generally mitigates potential risks to other aviation activities but raises concerns about intrusion of privacy, potential nuisance to landowners, and enjoyment of the outdoors, particularly when flights are conducted over private lands or over parks and other sensitive sites. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been charged with research and development of a concept called Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management (UTM) to handle drones and other low-flying air traffic. Private firms, including Amazon and Google, are reportedly working to develop separate private systems and approaches for controlling lowaltitude airspace. However, additional development and testing are needed to field reliable technologies for handling potentially large volumes of low-flying aircraft with varying degrees of autonomy. It is unclear whether delivery drones and urban air taxis will be allowed to fly where their operators wish, or be restricted to specific routes in the same way that automobiles are limited to traveling on public roads. Also unresolved is the potential conflict between the rights of operators of low-flying aircraft and those of landowners regarding undue nuisance and noise from lowflying aircraft. Debate continues over the roles of municipalities in setting when and where urban air transports can pick up and drop off passengers, what route they will fly, and what curfews or other restrictions might be established for AAM as well as for drone delivery services. The Drone Integration and Zoning Act (S. 905) seeks to establish formal state, local, and tribal authorities to control airspace within “immediate reaches,” which the bill defines as airspace at and below 200 feet above ground level (AGL). Similar legislation was offered in the 117th (S. 600) and 116th (S. 2607) Congresses. The Drone Federalism Act of 2017 (S. 1272, 115th Congress) had similarly sought to ensure that state, local, and tribal governments be granted sufficient authority to impose reasonable restrictions on operations of civil UAS below 200 feet AGL or within 200 feet of a structure (such as a house, apartment building, office, or communications tower) in order to preserve local interests regarding public safety, personal privacy, property rights, and land use management and to mitigate nuisances and noise pollution. Municipalities may play an increasingly important role in setting zoning guidelines for the use of private lands for urban air transportation. While federal regulation of airspace promotes uniformity across the national airspace system, future air mobility concepts may lend themselves to additional local oversight—particularly with respect to zoning and the location of vertiports for advanced air mobility and facilities for delivery drones—to address unique regional transportation needs and challenges. Congressional Research Service 21 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress Supersonic Flight Supersonic flight refers to flight that is faster than the speed of sound, which is typically around 700 mph at cruising altitudes but varies with pressure, temperature, and other factors.74 It has been over 45 years since the Concorde, the only certified commercial passenger airliner capable of supersonic flight, first entered service in 1976. The Concorde was retired from service in 2003 amid cost and safety concerns, and no supersonic passenger aircraft have flown since. Throughout its years of operation, the Concorde was criticized for its loud noise at subsonic speeds, particularly during takeoffs and departures, and was restricted from travelling supersonically when over land due to concerns about sonic boom (i.e., the shock wave formed by compression of air waves when an aircraft flies faster than the speed of sound). Community objections to sonic boom as well as the comparatively loud subsonic noise of supersonic aircraft have been major obstacles for public acceptance of supersonic flight. Despite its flaws and detractors, the Concorde demonstrated that supersonic passenger travel was technically achievable. Future supersonic transport airplanes could be commercially viable if they can offer airline service at reasonably competitive prices while reducing travel time for passengers over long routes. There may also be an entirely separate market for supersonic business jets. Notably, several companies (such as NetJets and Flexjet) offer fractional ownership of general aviation aircraft, a shared-ownership model similar to the time-share model in real estate. This approach could potentially allow a broader array of business and private aircraft users to gain access to supersonic flights at considerably lower cost than full ownership, potentially broadening the potential market for these aircraft. To address public concerns about sonic boom, companies developing supersonic aircraft believe that they will be able to demonstrate sonic boom signatures that are much quieter and much more acceptable than those of existing supersonic aircraft. The NASA Low Boom Flight Demonstrator program is developing the experimental X-59 QueSST (Quiet Supersonic Transport). The aircraft is designed to fly at Mach 1.42 while producing a sonic boom with a perceived loudness of 75 decibels (dB, comparable to a domestic vacuum cleaner).75 This would be quieter than the Concorde’s perceived loudness of 105 dB (comparable to a thunderclap or a loud sports stadium). A ground-level sonic boom measurement of 75 dB perceived noise level (PNLdB) has been suggested by some NASA researchers as a potentially acceptable level for unrestricted supersonic flight over land, although the FAA has not yet addressed an acceptable level for sonic boom. Congress may consider options for regulating sonic boom levels, areas or corridors where supersonic flights may occur, and noise and sonic boom criteria in the context of FAA reauthorization legislation. Provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) required the FAA to submit a report to Congress with recommended regulatory changes on a timeline that would permit overland supersonic flights. The FAA issued that report in April 2020, identifying the timetable for the initial steps to regulate the next generation of civilian supersonic aircraft. Further, the legislation required the FAA to consult with industry stakeholders on noisecertification issues, including operational differences between subsonic and supersonic aircraft. It also mandated that the FAA conduct rulemaking to revise 14 C.F.R. Part 91, Appendix B, 74 For further reading see CRS Report R45404, Supersonic Passenger Flights, coordinated by Rachel Y. Tang. 75 With respect to noise, a decibel (dB) is a measure of sound intensity. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale where an increase of 10 dB reflects a doubling of the sound pressure. The threshold of human hearing ranges between 0 and 20 dB depending on pitch or auditory frequency. A typical quiet room is about 40-50 dB and a normal conversational voice is about 60dB. Congressional Research Service 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress regulations to modernize the process for applying to operate civil aircraft at supersonic speeds for flight testing. In January 2021, the FAA published a final rule defining a new process for obtaining special authorization for supersonic flights that superseded the former Part 91, Appendix B, language.76 The 2018 FAA reauthorization act also required the FAA to conduct rulemaking to develop noise standards for sonic booms over the United States and for takeoff and landing and noise test requirements applicable to civil supersonic aircraft. The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) addressing noise certification of supersonic airplanes in April 2020.77 The proposed rule addressed subsonic noise but did not propose standards for sonic boom in general or for overland operations. The act also included language requiring the FAA to periodically review existing restrictions on supersonic flight of civil aircraft over land in the United States every two years, starting December 31, 2020. The reviews are to determine whether these restrictions may be eased to permit supersonic flight of civil aircraft over land. With respect to subsonic noise limits, newly designed aircraft certified after December 31, 2017, must meet U.S. “Stage 5” standards (internationally known as Chapter 14 standards, in reference to Chapter 14 of ICAO Annex 16).78 Stage 5 standards require aircraft to be at least 7 dB quieter than required by the previous Stage 4 noise standards, or 17 dB less than required by Stage 3 standards, cumulatively across three noise measurements (flyover, sideline, and approach).79 Supersonic aircraft developers argue that the Stage 5 standard was finalized after significant design work on some new supersonic designs had already been completed, and, consequently, significant design changes may be required to pass noise certification tests, including changes that may substantially limit aircraft characteristics such as payload capacity and range. Language in the 2018 FAA reauthorization offered in the Senate (S. 1405, 115th Congress, Section 5017) would have required that noise certification standards for future supersonic aircraft be no more stringent than standards that were in place for large subsonic aircraft on January 1, 2017. This would have had the effect of applying the Stage 4 noise standards in place on January 1, 2017. This language was not included in the enacted version of the 2018 FAA reauthorization act, thus leaving it to the FAA to set noise limits as part of its mandated rulemaking activities to address noise certification of supersonic aircraft. The FAA has proposed specific noise standards that are quieter than Stage 4 limits but higher than Stage 5 requirements that are yet to be finalized. Regardless of whether the FAA adopts these proposed standards, if European countries and other countries insist that supersonic aircraft meet Chapter 14/Stage 5 subsonic noise standards, engine options may be more limited, potentially impacting speed, range, and emissions characteristics of supersonic designs. Gaining international consensus and approvals to fly supersonically over other countries besides the United States may also be a critical element in determining the market viability of future civil supersonic aircraft designs. The 2018 FAA reauthorization act specifically directed the FAA to take a leadership role in creating federal and international policies, regulations, and standards to certify safe and efficient civil supersonic aircraft operations within U.S. airspace. In the current FAA reauthorization, Congress may consider options for assessing the noise limits for supersonic aircraft and reviewing the FAA’s approach, as well as the FAA’s efforts to work with other countries to harmonize noise requirements for supersonic aircraft that can strike a 76 FAA, “Special Flight Authorizations for Supersonic Aircraft,” 86 Federal Register 3782-3792, January 15, 2021. 77 FAA, “Noise Certification of Supersonic Airplanes,” 85 Federal Register 20431-20447, April 13, 2020. 78 FAA, “Stage 5 Airplane Noise Standards,” 82 Federal Register 46123-46132, October 4, 2017. 79 ICAO, “Reduction of Noise at Source,” at https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Pages/Reduction-of-Noise- at-Source.aspx. Congressional Research Service 23 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress balance between community noise concerns and industries’ ability to adopt suitable supersonic engine technologies. The Supersonic and Hypersonic Aircraft Testing Corridor Act (S. 902) would, if enacted, require the FAA to designate overland supersonic testing corridors running between California and Utah that would primarily be used for testing military aircraft but would be available for testing of civil aircraft so long as such testing does not conflict with military operations or testing in the corridor. Options for providing access to airspace and other opportunities to enable development and testing of supersonic civil aircraft may be an issue of particular interest during FAA reauthorization debate given the continuing interests in and challenges to pursuing supersonic civilian flight. Regulation of Commercial Space Activities80 The FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) regulates and licenses commercial space launch and reentry as well as commercial spaceports.81 In 2022, there were 79 FAAlicensed space launches, up from 54 in 2021 and 39 in 2020.82 The accelerating rate of commercial launches may raise questions about the resources needed for AST to process license applications promptly and conduct oversight of licensees. It has also led to concern in the commercial aviation industry about the FAA closing airspace more frequently to accommodate planned launches and reentries, resulting in delays or diversions for affected air traffic. Since 2020, several FAA-licensed commercial launches have carried human occupants into orbit, and several more have carried humans on shorter suborbital flights.83 In most cases, the FAA is explicitly prohibited from issuing regulations to protect the health and safety of humans aboard commercial spacecraft.84 That prohibition, which the law describes as a learning period, is scheduled to expire on October 1, 2023. In anticipation of the end of the learning period, the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (P.L. 114-90) directed the FAA to facilitate the development of voluntary industry safety standards and assess the industry’s readiness for a transition to safety regulation by the FAA. In 2016, the industry standards organization ASTM International formed a committee on commercial spaceflight, which has issued a number of standards and related documents.85 The FAA has issued several reports to Congress on the status of standards development and the readiness of the industry for safety regulation.86 As the end of the learning period approaches, Congress may choose to consider whether to extend the learning period again or allow it to lapse. With the growth of the commercial space launch industry and the emergence of commercial flights to space by wealthy private individuals, some in Congress have suggested the option of 80 Section contributed by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy. 81 See 51 U.S.C. Chapter 509 and 14 C.F.R. Chapter III. 82 FAA, Licensed Launches, https://www.faa.gov/data_research/commercial_space_data/launches/?type=Licensed. 83 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11940, Commercial Human Spaceflight, by Daniel Morgan. 84 See 51 U.S.C. §50905. 85 ASTM International, “Committee F47 on Commercial Spaceflight,” https://www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F47.htm. 86 FAA, FAA Evaluation of Commercial Human Space Flight Safety Frameworks and Key Industry Indicators (2017), https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2021-11/CSLCA_Sec111_Report_to_Congress.pdf; FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation Evaluation of Commercial Human Spaceflight Activities Most Appropriate for New Safety Framework (2019), https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2021-11/New-Safety-Framework-for-Commercial-Human-SpaceFlight-Completed-report.pdf; FAA, Final Report on Voluntary Industry Consensus Standards Development (2021); and FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation Evaluation of Commercial Human Space Flight Activities Most Appropriate for New Safety Framework (2023, draft), https://www.faa.gov/media/27296. Congressional Research Service 24 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress imposing fees or taxes on commercial space companies, either to support AST’s licensing activity, for other space-related purposes, or simply by analogy to fees and taxes paid by the commercial aviation industry.87 AST does not currently charge any fees or taxes.88 Aviation Safety The FAA has responsibility for overseeing compliance with safety regulations at airlines, charter aircraft operators, repair stations, aircraft and aircraft parts design organizations and manufacturers, and other regulated entities. The FAA Office of Aviation Safety (AVS) is responsible for developing regulations and certification standards and conducting oversight of aircraft; pilots, mechanics, and other safety-related personnel; airlines and other aircraft operators; aircraft maintenance and repair facilities; airport safety; and safety aspects of flight operations. It maintains a workforce of more than 7,200 aviation safety workers, including more than 4,000 field inspectors. Major new efforts for aviation safety likely to be considered in FAA reauthorization include • • • implementing safety management systems (SMS) throughout the aviation industry; implementing aircraft certification reforms; and addressing a number of ongoing safety challenges, including oversight of air tour and charter flights, safety of helicopter operations, potential radiofrequency signal interference that could impact air navigation and communications, and concerns over airport surface movement safety. Safety Management Systems The FAA defines SMS as a formal organization-wide approach to managing safety risk through structured and systematic procedures, practices, and policies intended to address and improve safety on a continuing basis.89 It includes formal processes for decisionmaking regarding safety risks; safety assurance; knowledge sharing; and the promotion of a strong safety culture through training, education, and communication. The FAA regards SMS as a proactive approach to managing safety and is taking steps to require its implementation broadly across all sectors of the aviation industry. In 2015, the FAA mandated that commercial passenger and all-cargo airlines that operate under air carrier operational regulations contained in 14 C.F.R. Part 121 implement FAA-approved SMS. On February 23, 2023, the FAA published a final rule requiring certain commercial service airports to develop an SMS.90 According to the FAA, 191 airports, included based on the volume of passengers and the number of flight operations, will need to develop and implement an FAAapproved SMS program. All large, medium, and small hub, as well as any airports with commercial international flights and airports with a three-year rolling average of 100,000 annual 87 See, for example, the SPACE Tax Act (H.R. 7547, 117th Congress) and Member discussion at U.S. Congress, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Starships and Stripes Forever—An Examination of the FAA’s Role in the Future of Spaceflight, hearings, 117th Cong., 1st sess., June 16, 2021, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG117hhrg46249/pdf/CHRG-117hhrg46249.pdf, p. 38. 88 It is explicitly prohibited from charging fees by 51 U.S.C. §50920. 89 See FAA, Safety Management System (SMS), at https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/sms/; FAA, Safety Management System, National Policy, Order 8000.369C, June 24, 2020, at https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/ media/Order/Order_8000.369C.pdf. 90 FAA, “Airport Safety Management System: Final Rule,” 88 Federal Register 11642-11674, February 23, 2023. Congressional Research Service 25 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress flight operations are included. The requirements went into effect on April 24, 2023, and will have a staggered implementation schedule. For hub airports, which make up the large majority of airports required to implement SMS, submittal of the SMS implementation plan is required by April 24, 2024. Nonhub airports averaging more than 100,000 annual flight operations are to submit their plans by October 24, 2024, and nonhub airports with less than 100,000 annual flight operations that have commercial international flights are to submit their plans by April 24, 2025. Once the FAA approves an SMS plan submitted by an airport, the airport will then be required to submit an SMS manual and an updated Airport Certification Manual to the FAA within 12 months following the approval date, and it must fully implement its airport SMS program within 36 months following the approval date. As other airports beyond the initial 191 meet the criteria for mandatory implementation of SMS, they will be required to submit an SMS plan to the FAA within 18 months after notification from the FAA that they meet the criteria compelling them to adopt SMS. The FAA is also taking steps to require SMS implementation for all commuter flight operations and for on-demand commercial air charters and air tour operators. On January 11, 2023, the FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would cover operators regulated under 14 C.F.R. Part 135, which encompasses scheduled commuter flight operations using small aircraft, generally having nine or fewer passenger seats, or charter operations in aircraft having 30 or fewer passenger seats.91 It would also cover certain passenger flights, primarily air tours, that land and depart from the same airport and stay within a 25-mile radius that may be conducted under 14 C.F.R. Part 91, General Operating and Flight Rules, with a formal letter of authorization to do so from the FAA. The proposed rule would require all such operators to develop, implement, and maintain an FAA-approved SMS program. While the proposal expands the number of operators that would have to carry out a proactive safety approach under an SMS framework, not all entities would be covered. Notably, the FAA is not at this time proposing to require SMS for: FAA-approved flight schools operated under 14 C.F.R. Part 141; training centers covered under 14 C.F.R. Part 142; aircraft repair stations regulated under 14 C.F.R. Part 145; aircraft fractional ownership programs like NetJets and FlexJet that operate under 14 C.F.R. Part 91 Subpart K; and operations using large aircraft (20 or more passenger seats or a maximum payload of 6,000 pounds or more) not used in common carriage that are regulated under 14 C.F.R. Part 125. The FAA aviation rulemaking committee (ARC) that was convened in 2009 to examine SMS among aircraft operators had recommended SMS requirements for these other regulated entities as well as for the Part 121 air carrier operations already required to have SMS and the Part 135 and Part 91 air tour operations that the FAA is proposing SMS requirements for.92 In the context of the current FAA reauthorization, Congress may consider whether to expand SMS requirements more broadly across the aviation industry, as well as different options for such an expansion. Under the same rulemaking, the FAA is also proposing SMS requirements for aircraft and aircraft engine manufacturers as mandated by the Aircraft Certification, Safety, and Accountability Act (Division V of P.L. 116-260). The law specifies that, at a minimum, the SMS be consistent with and complimentary to existing SMSs, allow for operational feedback from product customers and pilots, and allow for FAA approval and routine oversight. The FAA is required to conduct riskbased surveillance, inspections, audits, and continuous monitoring of type and production certificate-holder SMS programs. The FAA was also directed to work closely with ICAO and 91 FAA, “Safety Management Systems: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,” 88 Federal Register 1932-1972, January 11, 2023. 92 See discussion in FAA, “Safety Management Systems: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,” 88 Federal Register 19321972, January 11, 2023. Congressional Research Service 26 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress civil aviation authorities in other countries to encourage and assist with adoption of SMS by foreign manufacturers. The act further specifies that the SMS regulations must provide for a confidential employee reporting system for reporting hazards, issues, concerns, occurrences, and incidents without concern for reprisal. Manufacturers are to be required to submit summary reports of received employee reports at least twice per year. Such information submitted to the FAA is to be protected from public disclosure unless de-identified to protect the identity of submitters.93 The law also mandates the establishment of a code of ethics for each manufacturer applicable to all employees that formally sets safety as the organization’s top priority. As the FAA moves forward with efforts to apply SMS broadly throughout the aviation industry, Congress may take an interest in tracking the FAA’s progress on the SMS initiative and the potential challenges and complications with effectively implementing SMS programs, particularly among smaller aviation industry entities. It might consider FAA reporting requirements, GAO reviews, or other oversight actions to monitor SMS implementation as part of the current FAA reauthorization. Helicopter Operations In February 2014, the FAA mandated changes in helicopter operational procedures and cockpit technologies to improve operational safety of helicopter air ambulance flights.94 Subsequently, the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-190) directed the FAA to evaluate and update crash-resistance standards for helicopter fuel systems, and the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) mandated that all new manufactured helicopters be built to meet current crashworthiness standards, which previously applied only to new helicopter designs. Helicopter crashes involving air ambulances in Texas, Missouri, and Colorado in 2015 and a February 2018 air tour helicopter crash in Arizona stand out among aviation accidents that have raised safety concerns about the design of helicopter fuel systems. The accidents have prompted the NTSB to issue recommendations to the FAA that it update regulations and guidelines regarding helicopter fuel system crashworthiness.95 The European Union (EU) Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is contemplating action that would potentially require retrofit modifications to helicopters registered in EU countries to meet upgraded crashworthiness standards. In November 2022, EASA published a proposed amendment outlining various approaches to require retrofitted crash-resistant fuel systems on either some or all EU helicopters by either 2030 or 2038.96 Given the potential implications to U.S.-manufactured helicopters operated in Europe, as well as continued NTSB and congressional interest in helicopter safety and crashworthiness, Congress may revisit options to require fuel system improvements to helicopters currently in service, potentially including retrofit requirements for crash-resistant fuel systems in the current civil helicopter fleet. Additionally, safety concerns have been raised about helicopter air tours following high-profile air tour crashes in New York City and Hawaii. An NTSB investigation of a December 2019 93 See 49 U.S.C. §44735. 94 FAA, “Helicopter Air Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter, and Part 91 Helicopter Operations,” 79 Federal Register 9931-9979, April 22, 2014. 95 See especially, NTSB, Safety Recommendation A-15-12, July 23, 2015, https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/ recletters/A-15-012.pdf. 96 European Union Aviation Safety Agency, Notice of Proposed Amendment 2022-10: Improvement in the Survivability of Rotorcraft Occupants in the Event of a Crash, Phase 1 – Crash Resistant Fuel Systems, at https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/downloads/137237/en. Congressional Research Service 27 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress helicopter air tour crash in Hawaii cited the FAA’s failure to act on prior NTSB recommendations, including requiring helicopter air taxi and air tour operators to implement safety management systems and cue-based weather training, as factors in the crash.97 As noted above, the FAA has issued an NPRM that would mandate SMS among commercial air tour and other commercial helicopter operators. Amid FAA reauthorization debate, Congress may more closely monitor progress and address potential challenges with both moving forward with the FAA’s proposal to mandate SMS at small helicopter air tour companies and tailoring effective SMS programs to these operations. Aircraft Certification Reforms and Safety Oversight An important FAA function is certifying the safety of aviation products, including aircraft, aircraft engines, and major aircraft components. The FAA has developed a broad set of certification regulations pertaining to the type of aircraft that seeks to balance safety regulations and the degree of FAA oversight with the size and intended use of the aircraft. In the 2018 FAA reauthorization act, Congress directed FAA to delegate its authority over the certification of new and revised aircraft designs to employees of aircraft and component manufacturers. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) mandated significant changes in FAA oversight of aircraft certification. It directed the FAA to establish a Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee and required the agency to establish formal objectives to eliminate delays in certification and more closely oversee its Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) program, an established process for delegating certain certification functions to manufacturers. The act also required the FAA to establish a Regulatory Consistency Communications Board to review questions regarding regulatory interpretations related to the certification of aviation products. Subsequently, two crashes overseas involving a recently certified new variant of the Boeing 737 airplane, known as the Boeing 737 Max, led Congress to revisit these reforms to the aircraft certification process and FAA oversight of aircraft manufacturers and their delegated aircraft certification functions under ODA. In December 2020, the Aircraft Certification, Safety, and Accountability Act (Division V of P.L. 116-260) required the FAA to implement major changes in its policies and procedures concerning certification of transport aircraft, such as commercial passenger and cargo jets, including changes in policies for delegating certification authority to private entities. The Aircraft Certification, Safety, and Accountability Act mandated that • • the FAA institute extensive changes to the ODA program and oversight of that program; aircraft manufacturers implement FAA-approved SMS that establish formal organization-wide procedures, practices, and policies to manage safety-related risks; 97 Cue-based weather training refers to computer-based training systems used to provide pilots who fly in visual conditions with skills to recognize and respond to indicators of deteriorating weather conditions during flight. NTSB, “Failure of FAA to Implement NTSB Recommendations Contributed to Fatal Air Tour Helicopter Crash, NTSB Says,” press release, May 10, 2022, at https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20220510.aspx; NTSB, Collision into Terrain Safari Aviation Inc. Airbus AS350 B2, N985SA, at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/ ANC20MA010.aspx. Congressional Research Service 28 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Issues for the 118th Congress • • the FAA review and update requirements and guidance addressing flight deck human factors and the design of aircraft-pilot interfaces;98 and the FAA and manufacturers work with international partners to address pilot training standards in the context of aircraft certification and assess operational impacts of new automation technologies. The act makes it unlawful to interfere with the duties of ODA unit members, including exerting undue pressure on unit members or assigning them work not related to certification duties. The law also repeals two significant provisions of the FAA Authorization Act of 2018 that had directed the FAA to streamline aircraft certification processes and reduce delays, in part by fully utilizing its delegation and designation authorities. These changes were largely instigated by two crashes involving the Boeing 737 Max, the newest variant of a Boeing narrow-body jet that has been one of the most pop [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR47608. Public record. Not legal advice.