LEXIS-NEXIS® Congressional Universe-Document

LEXIS-NEXIS® Congressional

March 1, 2000, Wednesday

SECTION: PREPARED TESTIMONY

LENGTH: 2938 words

HEADLINE: PREPARED TESTIMONY OF CAPTAIN DUANE WOERTH AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL

BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION

WEDNESDAY, FAA'S BUDGET REQUEST AND FUNDING NEEDS

BODY:
Good morning Mr. Chairman, I am Captain Duane Woerth, President of the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA). ALPA represents the professional interests of 55,000 pilots who fly for 51 airlines in the United States and Canada. We appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the very complex issue of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)budget and its impact on the programs critical to the safe and efficient operation of our National Airspace System (NAS) at every level.

This subcommittee and the full committee as well has continually demonstrated genuine leadership in its pursuit of legislative solutions to critical aviation related issues, and we applaud you for your efforts. It is our sincere hope that the differences that are holding up enactment of H.R. 1000 can be resolved soon, so that the much needed funding that this bill provides can be put to its intended use. There has been much discussion recently about the effectiveness of the FAA when it comes to managing programs through their life cycle. Indeed, it is questionable as to whether or not the FAA is even capable of meeting the growing demands of its customers in the next few years. There have been numerous and varied remedies proposed. I am not here to fix blame, or discuss the relative merits of the proposed remedies. Our concern is simple - there is not sufficient funding being made available in the appropriate areas for the continued safe and efficient operation of the NAS.

The primary concern of ALPA is safety.

We are committed to "raising the bar" when it comes to the importance of safety as we seek to maintain and modernize our National Airspace System. We have enjoyed the safest air traffic system in the world for many years now, but unfortunately our air traffic service system has not kept pace with the demands for increased capacity. We are in jeopardy of falling even further behind because the FAA has been unable, not necessarily through any fault of their own, to appropriately allocate sufficient resources to adequately address these shortcomings.

The United States consumers and taxpayers deserve a new air traffic control system that can handle increased capacity well into the future. We must address all aspects of the system from available concrete to ultra-high airspace configuration. We simply don't have the infrastructure to support the current demand - much less any further increase in capacity. We can't continue to piecemeal pilot and controller programs. This simply will not work and may actually have a detrimental effect on the system. Likewise, we can no longer afford to continue this short-range budget process based on our current appropriation and allocation process. We need to concentrate on long term budget processes while making full use of such revenue sources as the Aviation Trust Fund and the General Fund. It is only through the full and appropriate use of all available revenue that we will ever be able to truly fix our NAS. We can't improve capacity by changing the way pilots fly airplanes; we have to improve the environment in which they fly. We can only do this by providing the pilot and controller better equipment with which to do their jobs, a positive structure in which to work, and adequate ground systems to support all weather operations.

I am going to take a time phased approach to my comments. We need to examine the effect budget shortages have had on the programs we rely on today, and then the impact of the budget on programs we are counting on to alleviate these problems in coming years. These issues are inescapably related, because the past and present are driving the future, and we absolutely cannot afford to have a repeat of past performance. The impact has been felt across a variety of programs. Some of these programs such as Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) and Satellite Navigation have tremendous unrealized potential. We are concerned because funding continues to be cut from these programs. Other programs such as Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO) and Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) have already been implemented on a local basis. These programs cause us concern because lack of funding prevents completion of necessary safety analysis thereby preventing full capacity benefits from being achieved:

A multitude of innovative capacity enhancement initiatives are currently being implemented piecemeal by the FAA in hopes of addressing problems and constraints in the existing system. This system has suffered from a lack of funding since its inception. Ongoing technological initiatives such as Free Flight Phase 1, Controller Pilot Data Link Communications, and the Safe Flight 21 Program have only received subsistence funding. The FAA has been forced to rely on industry to finance significant portions of these potentially highly beneficial programs.

One of the most potentially beneficial areas lacking appropriate attention involves the FAA Administrator's number one priority - runway incursions. There are several programs being developed that could significantly improve safety and help capacity in this area, but the primary candidate, Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) is still years away from any significant deployment. Research and Development on other promising technologies that could potentially be available sooner isn't even being pursued. There have been still other technologies tested at airports around the country, but because of the lack of funds to support aggressive research, these programs continue to move in glacial increments. This is a program that could significantly enhance safety at our nation's airports.

At the other end of the spectrum, we have programs that have already been implemented. These programs have had critical deficiencies since they were implemented, because they were primarily targeted at increased capacity without regard to their impact on safety. As I previously said, our primary concern is safety and programs such as,/LAHSO, and PRM did not include sufficient modeling, simulation and safety/risk analysis. This is primarily do to inadequate funding during initial implementation.

The LAHSO program sits at a critical juncture. The FAA and industry have worked hard to maximize the potential of the program as it now stands. The FAA lacks the manning and funding to support the simulation, modeling, test and evaluation necessary for LAHSO to be proven to meet the basic safety requirements necessary for its expanded use. The FAA is asking the airlines and airports to fund the studies necessary to validate locally unique runway configurations for use in the LAHSO program. This program languishes in stalemate because of this lack of adequate funding and manning. This has resulted in a further abrogation of the FAA's role in promoting aviation.

The PRM program, another technology capable of improving both flying safety and capacity has suffered from a lack of sufficient funding to accomplish the detailed analysis and training needed to fully implement the program. Additionally, because so few of the actual radar units exist, the ability to deploy them, should all the other issues be answered, is severely hampered. In fact, this past year a PRM radar unit scheduled to be implemented at one airport was diverted to another location on the opposite coast. A technical issue that has been a problem in this program, the requirement for dedicated radio frequencies, can be easily solved through the purchase of a low cost anti-blocking device. The FAA is not even able to consider this option because of funding constraints.

Critical regulatory projects, such as TCAS on freighters continues to languish in the FAA bureaucracy because the agency lacks sufficient staff to aggressively pursue action necessary for implementation. This is a rulemaking the FAA had committed to pursue.

The impact of budget shortfalls is widespread and deep. ! have mentioned several examples of where staff shortages have impacted critical programs. My staff tells me of numerous examples where they have been working with a particular FAA staff person, sometimes for months or years, only to find one day that that individual has gone back to the field and no ones knows when, or even if, the replacement will show up. These are just a few very basic examples of where the FAA has been forced to take the Band-Aid approach rather than performing the fundamental analysis.

The FAA has acknowledged shortfalls in their current fiscal programs through their request for an FY 2000 Supplemental Proposal. This won't help these specific programs, but is indicative of the problems fiscal constraints are causing. We are at a critical decision point in this path we are on toward continuing to improve the safety and capacity of our NAS. We have committed millions of dollars to programs that are just now beginning to be implemented and yield results. We cannot afford to reduce our level of support for these emerging technologies at this time. In fact we must be more aggressive than ever in our advocacy or these programs. Free Flight Phase I (FFPI) represents the first step in the deployment of near term air traffic management tools capable of providing real benefits to both users and providers. These applications leverage proven technology with procedural enhancements to secure benefits by 2002. In addition to Free Flight Phase 1, two other very promising applications are maturing to the point where they are about to be fielded. Those programs are Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) and Automatic Dependent Surveillance -Broadcast (ADSB). These programs, combined with the emerging operational concept for Free Flight Phase 2 (FFP2) provide the foundation for all other NAS modernization programs. We all know the funds are available. Use of Aviation Trust Fund and General Fund moneys would ensure adequate financing. We must be innovative in our pursuit and vocal in our support of adequate funding.

The limited deployment of these Free Flight Phase I Core Capabilities has proven the potential of these systems: - Conflict Probe as represented by the User Request Evaluation Tool (URET) - Traffic management Advisor (TMA). single center operations (SC) - Passive Final Approach Spacing Tool (pFAST) - Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) with Airline Operations Centers(AOCs) - Surface Movement Advisor (SMA)

Until just recently, funds were not even available for the uninterrupted deployment of these capabilities. Current funding only carries FFPI deployments through 2003. These tools have only been deployed to a very few locations; their impact is still minimal. This is a NAS Modernization strategy to manage risk exposure while incrementally providing early benefits to NAS users and service providers. Deployment of these capabilities requires the necessary support infrastructure at candidate locations for the implementation of these capabilities. Since FFPI is a limited deployment, further deployment of the capabilities is needed to sustain and increase the receipt of benefits. These tools are aimed primarily at improving air carrier operations at major airports or in the enroute and terminal airspace structure. To fully realize the potential of these systems we must insure a fully funded, coordinated effort between these programs and the program designed to springboard from them, FFP2.

Two complementary programs, CPDLC Builds 1/IA and Safe Flight 21, are also in a similar funding situation. CPDLC involves the deployment of a limited data !ink message set at Miami Air Route Traffic Control Center and Safe Flight 21 is the ongoing operational evaluation of ADS-B in the Ohio River Valley by the Cargo Airline Association and Capstone in Alaska. These programs are designed to begin to migrate the benefits further into other flying communities, particularly General Aviation.

Our current VHF radio frequency spectrum is completely saturated. There is absolutely no room for any expansion. We can't redesign airspace to make it more efficient; we can't even build any more runways because we don't have the radio frequencies available to talk to the aircraft using the airspace or runways. The program being developed to alleviate this problem, datalink communications has suffered from minimal funding from the outset. CPDLC would not have even gotten off the ground had it not been for the initiative of an air carrier to suggest the program, and offer to equip its aircraft with new radios to support the implementation. This is a program that involves extensive coordination between pilots, controllers, and manufacturers. It is critical that this system function seamlessly in an end to end configuration. It doesn't matter if the engineers can make it work perfectly, if the users - pilots and controllers - won't use it. There has been a tremendous amount of Human Factors research put into making sure this program works - and a demonstration is scheduled within the year. The FAA is currently reviewing the Build IA program in light of fiscal realities. This is our ONLY hope for reducing frequency congestion and freeing up voice so that it can be used when it is really needed. This is only the first step in what will be a program to replace all existing FAA radios over the next 20 or so years. We must show strong support now, and in the long term, if we hope to ever impact this problem and improve safety and capacity.

Automatic Dependent Surveillance is an emerging technology with practically limitless applications. It can provide Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance capabilities. There has been a limited operational evaluation of its capabilities ongoing for almost a year now. To date spending by private industry exceeds the FAA by greater than 2 to 1. Several of the applications of ADS-B have far-reaching potential - particularly as a surveillance medium. A joint government/industry team, under the auspices of the RTCA, is currently examining ADS-B for its potential as a future nationwide surveillance source - supplementing, or even replacing conventional radars. This is an extremely promising technology. However, we cannot afford to become overly enamored with it. We must ensure that adequate testing and evaluation is done on all of the applications before they migrate into the NAS on scheduled air carder operations. The work being done in Alaska and the Ohio River Valley is yielding very valuable data. We must insure the management of these programs, under the Safe Flight 21 structure, is able to efficiently use the experience gained in these trials in the development of applications that could be deployed throughout the NAS.

We have been making significant progress in the very important, yet under appreciated, area of volcanic activity reporting. We have again been very fortunate here because we have not lost an aircraft in flight because of volcanic activity. Unfortunately this falls in the category of "better lucky than good." This ash destroys engines, avionics components, and can even find its way into fuel, hydraulic, and oxygen systems. Millions of dollars have been spent in repairing aircraft that have flown through volcanic ash.Most of this could have been prevented. I see that in the 2001 budget request, the volcano monitoring funding line has been zeroed out.

Another government/industry group working through RTCA is in the process of developing the operational concept for what will be known as Free Flight Phase 2. This will be the program that will take our national airspace system to the next step. It will coordinate all of these programs to ensure that they are developed and implemented in a harmonized manner. Although FFP 2 isn't scheduled to begin until 2003, it is essential that funding be made available now, and throughout the course of the program to ensure that it can be implemented as scheduled. This is going to be a massive effort requiring the cooperation of many diverse interests within government and industry. Industry has demonstrated its commitment to making/his all work. We need to see a similar commitment from the government, particularly the FAA. We need to see this in the form of financial support to these critical programs. The government must commit to dedicate long term financing so that the FAA doesn't have to submit to annual budget exercises and balancing acts just to keep its head above water. The replacement of our NAS infrastructure is essential to the continued growth of our national economy.

We must maintain the momentum that has been generated by the consensus building government/industry activities. The FAA's willingness to seek industry input has resulted in programs that have the potential to increase system capacity and safety while upgrading our NAS infrastructure. This must remain a consensus effort, and it must stay focused on long term improvement to the entire system - from available concrete to airspace structure. We have programs and technology capable of meeting these goals. It must be our objective to ensure that adequate funding is made available to do this. It is the responsibility of this Congress to ensure that all potential funding sources are considered. This includes the Aviation Trust Fund as well as the General Fund. It is time to take the bold political steps necessary to guarantee the continued safety and efficiency of our National Airspace System. I hope we can all work together to see that the programs we need receive the kind of timely financial support that is necessary.

END

LOAD-DATE: March 3, 2000