Were focusing the use of our resources to deport and remove people on felons, not families. We want to stop tearing families apart. [ applause ] were emphasizing national security, Public Safety and Border Security over tearing families apart. We have created a new defer ed we have created a new divert Action Program for parents, for those who have been in this country for years who have been integrated members of society. There are by most estimates Something Like 11 million undocumented immigrants living in this country. The reality is that given our resources, theyre not going to be deported by any administration, republican or democrat. The most striking thing about that number of people is at least half, perhaps more than half have been here in excess of ten years. So the president and i in november directed the creation of a new deferred Action Program for those who have been here five years who have children who are citizens or lawful permanent residents and who have committed no serious crime. The reality is we have to deal with these people. We have to account for these people. And we should encourage them to come out of the shadows. As all of you know, our actions have been challenged in the courts. And i thank this organization for your support of our position in that lawsuit in texas, the National League of cities filed a brief that i think says it best. Dacca and to be baa the deferred Action Program for parents, will fuel Economic Growth in cities across the country, increase Public Safety and Public Engagement and facilitate the full integration of immigrant residents by promoting family and limiting family separation. Thats from the National League of cities. Thank you. For my Homeland Security point of view, from my Homeland SecurityLaw Enforcement point of view, we need to encourage people who have been here for years to come out of shadows, be held accountable. Frankly, the litigation and the decision and the injunction puts us in an untenable position. The judge does not quarrel with the notion that we have the ability to engage in prosecutorial discretion. Prioritize criminals over those who have been here and not committed any serious crimes. I want to take the additional step and encourage them to come out of the shadows so that we know who they are. The injunction basically prevents us from doing that. Were supposed to somehow leave these people in the shadows. We want to take steps to bring them forward, have them pay taxes, apply for deferred action and apply for a work authorize, to encourage these people to be participants in society, report crimes, pay taxes, and get on the books, so the only thing ill say about the case is this is what appeals courts are for. So what we say, what we must say to people in your communities who ive personally met with now, dont lose hope. As Martin Luther king said, the art of the moral universe is long but it always bends toward justice. Those who in this country struggle for citizenship, struggle to be something more than a second class person know that history is on your side. Now heres my ask. We have eliminated through our executive actions one of our executive actions, the secure Communities Program. Secure communities, the reality is was controversial legally and politically and weve replaced it with a new program called a priority enforcement program. In my view working together with mayors governors, sheriffs, Police Chiefs so that we can focus our resources on convicted criminals is a Public Safety imperative. That was the goal of the secure Communities Program, but it had come legally and politically controversial, but the overarching goal in my view is a Public Safety imperative. In 177 jurisdictions, states, cities, counties, to one degree or another, there were limitations placed on that jurisdictions ability to cooperate with our immigration personnel in the transfer of criminals for purposes of removal. Since january 1, 2014, over 4,000 detainers by our enforcement personnel were not honored. Frankly, in my view, this state of affairs puts Public Safety at risk. So weve done away with the secure Communities Program and created a new program in its place which in my view solved the legal and political controversy. Were no longer placing detainers on individuals except if there is probable cause to solve the legal issue. Were replacing that with requests for notification. Were no longer putting detainers on people based simply on an arrest. Were now only seeking the transfer of suspected terrorists, felons, convicted felons, those convicted of aggravated felonies josh those in street gangs. Those convicted of significant misdemeanors and those convicted of three or more misdemeanors. Heres my ask. We want to work with you to restore this relationship. Weve replaced secure communities with a new program for the benefit of Public Safety, but i need a partner in those in this room, in governors and mayors, county commissions and so forth. Weve done our part to end the controversial secure Communities Program. Now i ask that you and others get with your city attorney, your city counsel, your police commissioner, your chief, get ahold of the policy document that i issued in november to see how weve replaced the secure Communities Program for the benefit of all of those we serve, and if youre one of those 177 jurisdictions, you will get a knock on the door from me, because we want to work with you to rebuild this relationship. Many my view, it is a Public Safety imperative. Elsewhere in our department, were moving forward on our Cyber Security mission. We had legislation passed late last year. The administration has a new proposal for Cyber Security this year which we hope the congress will act on. Were doing a number of things to reform the way in which we do business in the department of security. The department of Homeland Security, weve filled all the senior level vacancies. Were rebuilding morale within the organization. Were moving in the intersection of more transparency and so forth. So this is a good time right now for Homeland Security. We have a new budget, and were moving forward with our very Important Mission but any overarching message with all of you is it takes a partnership with the men and women in this room for Homeland Security, for hometown security, for safety for all the people we as Public Servants represent. The last thing ill say to you is for my part i recognize that Homeland Security is a balance. Its a balance between basic physical security and our american values. The things we cherish, our right to travel, diversity, the diversity we cherish, our immigrant heritage we cherish. I like tell audiences that i can build you a perfectly safe city. We could build higher walls. We can interrogate more people. We could erect more scanning devices. We could screen more people to create a perfectly safe space, but it would not be a shining city on hill. It would be a prison. So Homeland Security must be a balance between security of our people and the preservation of the things that we value as americans. I look forward to working with all of you in the days ahead on our joint Homeland SecurityPublic Safety mission. Thank you very much and thank you for listening to me. Secretary johnson on behalf of the National League of cities and its members, i want to thank you for joining us today. I also want too thank you for all the work you do to keep our cities safe, our country strong and our citizens protected. It is now my great pleasure to introduce the members of this afternoons panel on infrastructure and Climate Change. At this time let me introduce our panel and each of these panelists are incredible folks and what they do on behalf of all of us and in their particular focus for us with cities. First dr. Ernest moniz, the secretary of the department of energy. [ applause ] please join me also in welcoming gina mccarthy, the administrator of the Environmental Protection agency. [applause] and finally i would like to invite to the stage peter rogoff who is the undersecretary of transportation. Peter, thank you for joining us. [applause] im going to ask each of these panelists to just give us a brief comment and then were going to go into a series of questions that are topics that are so important to us as cities as well as in their realms of responsibility. Mr. Secretary to you first. Actually. It doesnt matter. Mr. Secretary. Why dont you start . Thank you, mayor becker and also greetings to my administration colleagues here. Im not going to get into things that you know very well like the importance of cities and the importance of cities also in the context of our climate challenge. But let me focus on a few items in these opening remarks. Of course, all of you have tremendous responsibilities in terms of managing a lot of infrastructure in this country. Let me say a word about the core Energy Review that we expect to have coming out in a few weeks. This is a study thats been going on for over a year across the administration looking specifically at the issues of Energy Infrastructure. Transmission, storage, and distribution of energy that includes electricity and fuels. It includes looking at reliability, resilience, safety, security of infrastructure. And well be coming out with that shortly. Some of the findings in there, ill just note, things like looking at analyzing the risks from storm surges, for example. Theres modelling there showing that category one storms could inundate about 1,000 vital substations over these next decades. Heat waves, degrading our infrastructure but also increasing things like cooling requirements. Oil and gas supplies depend upon reliable electricity to operate but in turn, particularly our power sector relies on natural gas, a complex interdependency that we have to be careful about. The energy industry, another different aspect is by 2020, we expect to need to fill about 2 million jobs in the energy industry, and, of course work we need to, therefore, focus on some of the training areas which we are doing. The in addition, some of the outcomes of the qer are already in our fiscal year 16 budget, so i can talk about those. For example, we will have in there 63 million proposals for state grants for reliability and for energy assurance. So hopefully the states, the cities will be working together to come forward with those planning activities which then in turn can lead to eligibility, we hope, for what will be major Infrastructure Project support. Also in the budget theres something called the local energy program, and that is 20 million to help cities and counties accelerate investments in efficiency and clean energy. So these are just some of the items that are in that budget. Let me just mention two new things today. We are issuing now a notice of Technical Assistance for our 16 Climate Action champions. One of them is seated here at the table. So hes happy. Maybe there are 15 more of you out there happy with that particular grant. But also were also pleased to announce 6 million for our Clean Cities Program for alternative fuel Vehicle Market growth projects, so this will support 11 communityled projects to reduce market barriers and improve buyer awareness of plug in electric and other alternative fuel vehicles. One such project will enable visitors in orlando, for example, to rent and receive information on plugin electrics and a whole bunch of other projects as i say that will be announced today. To those are just a few of the things that we have moving forward in terms of clean energy, climate, and Energy Infrastructure reliability and resilience. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much, and i hope everyone is taking notes on opportunities there may be to help advance efforts in your community through these department of energy initiatives. Administrate. First of all, thank you for moderating and thank you for being one of the really best mayors in the u. S. Its so exciting to see all the work youre doing. And hes also finding time to help with our committees, and so i thank you for being a great advisor to the agency. First of all, thank you, and thank you for letting me be back again. I dont know what i did wrong last time but maybe i did something right. Its great. I know youre all dieing to get to your questions. You always are. We always follow up with them so let me be brief and thank them for letting me join. I just want to mention a couple of things because i know that communities across the u. S. Are particularly, our cities and towns have been really wonderful partners for epa both in 1995ing how best the spend things like a state revolving funds effectively to look at ground fields redevelopment and to support that. Our fiscal year budget this year, the president s request has really been recognizing what a great partner you are and is looking in a variety of ways to advance that partnership with additional dollars. I wanted to point out a few things. Number one, the 42 of epa budget goes to state local communities describes. The president is looking to provide us additional funds to continue to Work Together and particularly on Climate Resilience so we can provide you expertise and tools that you need to address your changing weather patterns. The extreme weather events but also we know that climate is most significantly challenging on Water Infrastructure. So were dealing with the new challenge of Climate Change and the old challenge about what do we do with water and waste Water Infrastructure. What you all investigated in 40 or 50 years ago is needing repeal as well as the new challenges on the Drinking Water side. Were going to continue to work with you on integrated planning but were also, the president has requested a significant increase over last years request in the area of srf. Were looking at new ways of continuing to support water and waste Water Infrastructure not just in terms of helping with resilience and helping you look at how to do planning and Green Infrastructure but we announced the Water Infrastructure and Water Finance center. Thats a way to have one place to go to think about whether there are creative financing opportunities that will bring private sector dollars to the table. Build partnerships because we know that the money that we have in the Public Sector is not going to be able to get the job done that were seeing because theres 600 billion in infrastructure need out there over the next 20 years. We have to pump it up and find new ways to finance it. Were also moving forward this year to lay the platform for our center under wifia because thats an important opportunity to take advantage of creative financing that the transportation agencies have found effective and we want to do it as well. Were going to be building up that center as well. Hopefully well be creating our partnership and enhancing it and looking for every opportunity to understand what your needs are and to support that as effectively as we can, and i think ill stop there. Thank you. Well, thank you. First and foremost, i need to express my apologies from a former mayor and former nlc member anthony fox. He is recovering from some minor knee surgery but hes just not up and about otherwise hes be here with you today. Let me also echo what a great partner mayor becker is. Hes not just a great advisor to us but he and his city have been a great grantee. Captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2008 screeria nigeria. Test test test. Agencies to develop appropriate rules for small uas operations. Such rules must allow to take advantage of core capability of technology, fly with minimal human involvement nonvisual line of sight. Safety is amazons top priority. Earlier this month they discussed uas safety with leaders of aviation. Im delighted to report these authorities are enthusiastically pursuing frame works and operational rules for uas. The approach they are taking is imminently reasonable. Uas should be simple and performance based. The basic Regulatory Framework should be put in place without delay. American commercial entities want to Perfect Technology to do so we must conduct testing. A large indoor facility in downtown seattle. Of course we need to satisfy and test these designs outdoors exposed to flight conditions our uas will experience in operations. We are very grateful to faa to grant us permission to conduct uas in the United States. Were egger to get flying here as we have abroad. Its more restrictive than rules and approvals we conduct outdoor testing in uk and elsewhere. Even more limited to applicable amateur uas flyers. Took far too longer much longer, over half a year than it took in other countries. The good news is that while the faa was considering our applications for testing we innovated so rapidly uas approved we dont test weve moved to more advanced designs were testing abroad. Last friday we asked permission to fly advanced uas in the United States as well and we are hopeful this permission will be granted quickly. Although the United States is catching up and permitting current commercial uas testing the United States remains behind in planning for future commercial uas operations. We are grateful for faas newly mprm so far as it goes but it doesnt go far enough. Unlike europe not addressing highly automated operations beyond visual line of sight. Mprm requests comments on whether the rule should prevent operations beyond visual line of sight and how technology should be evaluated. This is not to suggest regulators here or abroad can quickly adopt actual rules for uas operations beyond visual line of sight. That may take some time but surely u. S. Regulators should start proposing regulatory frame works and rules for future commercialerations now. Because the United States remains behind in planning for future commercial uas operations, one might assume that Congress Must step in to provide faa authority to act. But the fact is with few exceptions the agency already has adequate statutory authority. What the faa needs is impetus lest the the United States fall further behind. Any impetus given by embraced by faa should result in agency commencing now to plan and develop rules for uas operations to encompass highly automated flights beyond visual line of sight. So in conclusion madam chair i look forward to working with you and your subcommittee and faa to ensure that important commercial uas Services Become available in the United States safely and soon and i look forward to your questions. Thank you. I would like to welcome mr. Jeff vander werff representing American Farm bureau federation. Thank you Sub Committee cheruiyot and Ranking Members of the submatt. Im a familiarer from michigan. I farm with my family outside of sparta where i raise corn, wheat, soybeans and apples with my father uncle and brother. Im the fourth generation of my family to work our home farm purchased by great grandfather dutch immigrant nearly 80 years ago. Today my wife and i are proud to be raising fifth generation on that farm. On my farm responsible for daytoday activity agriculture and agri nomics. As a farmer who uses precision agriculture and understand data im here to discuss the potential benefits and pitfalls of Unmanned Aircraft systems for my farm in michigan. Last summer i attended precision agriculture demonstration included Unmanned Aircraft across fields gathering data. Explanation included with explanation of images and that data. I walked away knowing this was the next solution on my farm. As a farmer who relies on precision agriculture techniques i rely heavily on the data to produce accurate information. Accurate information is critical to the day to day Business Decisions i make. These decisions affect my yields, Environmental Impact ultimately the economic viability of my operation. Using an Unmanned Aircraft has a potential to provide me with other accurate tool to use in making optimal decisions to maximize the return of my familys business. One takeaway i had after seeing Unmanned Aircraft was ability on insect infestation and shortages. I walk 3,000 acres of land we farm. While this method is effective, its not real efficient. Using an Unmanned Aircraft would allow me to address threats quicker and more importantly before they develop into significant or potentially catastrophic problems. Producing Environmental Impact is another significant benefit of using Unmanned Aircraft. The imagery from Unmanned Aircraft allows me to spot treat sections of my fields as opposed to watering or spraying an entire field. Images from the Unmanned Aircraft will allow me to identify the specific locations where a specific treatment, be it fertilizer, water pesticides are necessary. This allows me to use more broadly across entire field. By spot treating threats to a crop, i not only lower the cost of treatment but i also have the potential of lowering Environmental Impact by minimizing the application. While this technology has the potential to be another tool in the toolbox there are certainly some pitfalls we need to discuss. The privacy and security of the Data Collected by Unmanned Aircrafts is concerning to farmers and ranchers. Even if an individual operator follows all the applicable rules, regulations and best manager practices on his or her farming operation, there is still concern that regulatory agencies or one of the numerous environmental organizations that unnecessarily target production agriculture might gain access to individual farm data through subpoenas. The biggest fear that farmers face in Data Collection is that third parties, including United States government, could gain access to our data and use it against us. Questions abound within the Agriculture Community about who owns and controls the data we generate. If a farmer contracts with a Company Authorized to fly uas does the farmer own data generated or is it shared with both the contractor and farmer. In the case of a farm on rented ground, do i the tenant or does my landlord own that data. Again, the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems will be an important edition to formers management techniques but critical the data remain under the ownership and control of the farmer and is not available to Government Agencies or others without permission. In conclusion, farm bureau is glad to see federal Aviation Administration introduce its notice of proposed rule making for small uas, farm bureau in the process of developing comments to faa regarding this proposed rule. It is our hope farmers and ranchers will be able to secure the rights through this process to use uas part of their precision ag systems. I thank you for the opportunity today and look forward to answering your question. Thank you. I want to thank all of our panelists. I would like to direct my first question to miss gilligan. What i wanted to ask you about was with this new area of rule making by faa and implementation of small uas rule and squenlt rules that obviously need to be addressed, how do we plan how does the agency plan to fund this effort . And i saw in the notice of rule making there is contemplation of recovery, registered Unmanned Aircraft that we could discern 150 for knowledge and test of operators and 50 to verify the id of an applicant. So is that going to cover all the resources that you need Going Forward in an expanding area given we have other areas including implementing and a lot of other things we want to do for the airspace . Senator at this point the faa has absorbed a lot of the cost of beginning the implementation process for bringing uas into the airspace. We do have pending in fy 2016 appropriations and president s budget request, we have additional growth in personnel and research and Development Dollars and facilities and equipment dollars. So as we identify our requirements we may be making additional requests through the budget process. Obviously if we can defend those, we Hope Congress can support those as well. Do you anticipate this is going to be a selffunded thing . In other words the fees people pay will fund this within the faa or not. No at this point the notice of proposed rule making does not fund the entire program. Those fees you identified are to offset the cost of those particular elements. In terms of finalizing rule making and providing safety oversight and issuing approval as we do with manned operations right now, we do not charge fees for those services faa provides to the industry and we will at this point provide those services to the uas industry as well. Okay. Can i also follow up on the issue of as i understand a proposed rule prohibits uas operation above people. We obviously allow other types of aircraft to go over people including, you know, helicopters, et cetera. So what was the thinking behind the prohibition and is it a perceived dangerousness with these Unmanned Systems themselves or is this something that you anticipate and addressing in the next reiteration of rules . In the proposal for small uas, we are talking about vehicles that are not designed against any standards, either faa standards or industry set standards, which is different from what we have for the manned vehicles. Because of that we are looking at how to mitigate that risk. One of the limitations in the proposal is to limit the amount of operation over people not involved in the operation. That is an area weve also asked for comment and well be looking at whether and how we can best balance that. Again, because were talking about introducing systems that arent designed or manufactured in any kind of system that were accustomed to, we think thats a rick that does need to be addressed in its rule making. Mr. Misener as you hear this and with some of the issues youve raised given how amazon proposes to use these unmanned terms to help major delivery where do you see this issue in the rule making Going Forward . Miss gilligan, if you can help address some of the concerns mr. Misener raised as well. First i would like to hear from mr. Misener on that. Thank you. What faa has done in mprm is fine as far as it goes. It really needs to go further. We need to be looking further down the road to beyond visual line of sight, highly automated operations. Its coming. I can assure you its coming quickly. The fact that were not yet even proposing rules or proposing frame works for the rules is lamentable. I think we ought to move ahead now and at least be thinking about those rules as opposed to dismissing them as the mprm did. Thank you. How do you address the concerns mr. Misener raises in terms of the pace with which the faa is Going Forward to issue these rules in light of our International Competitors . We agree we need to and are focusing on the areas authorizing operations beyond visual line of sight. There are several Technology Challenges to being able to do that, including the need to address the issue of what we call sense in a void. Right now we have pilots in manned aircraft and they have a regulatory responsibility to see and avoid other traffic. That is a Technology Challenge that still needs to be completely addressed for unmanned vehicles. There are will issues around the commanding control system and assuring, again, theres a standard against which those can be designed that will assure a level of safety. So we have a number of initiatives under way with the uas industry, rtca is working on standards for both sense and avoid and command and control and that involves all of the industry. We have another subgroup under our Aviation Rule Making Committee that is looking at beyond line of sight beyond visual line of sight operations as well. That will be the next focus area. That will be an area that well look at setting standards for. But its a far more complex area and it is one where we dont yet have Technology Standards established. We expect to get those from rtca over the next year or so. I thank you all, have followup questions like to turn it over to Ranking Member cantwell. Thank you. With this new interim rule that is out this afternoon does that put us on par with the europeans or are we still behind . Miss gilligan . I think were in a different place than the europeans. I think as dr. Dillingham indicated there are a number of locations where they are able to authorize different types of operations because they have much less complexity in their airspace system much less general aviation that tends to operate at those lower attitudes. So were faced with some additional challenges a number of our aviation partners around the world dont face. What we have authorized today as we are issuing our exemptions under section 333 from reauthorizing, we will the operator will be able to immediately operate as long as the operation is below 200 feet. If they want to go above 200 feet, they must still go to the air Traffic Organization and identify the airspace where they want to operate so we can assure safe separation of the unmanned system from whatever general aviation or other operations there may be in that airspace. But we believe this is increasing the flexibility that we can give now as we grant exemptions. Mr. Misener i dont know if you have any input on that. Mr. Dillingham i wanted to ask you. Are we always going to be behind europeans because they have already implemented their gps system and were on radar and they have much more information about who and what is in the airspace . Senator, i think we are i wouldnt say we are behind. We are when you talk about gps system and next gen were trying to harmonize and make it operable. With regard to uas, because of those differences between the u. S. And some Foreign Countries in terms of illegal framework in terms of japan where they have been flying agriculture things for while one of the differences is the farmer owns the airspace above his land, so therefore its sort of a different perspective there. I think moving forward, the u. S. Working with the International Aviation community and the uas industry well, in fact maintain our position as aero nautical leaders in the world. One of the things i said in my statement, if we were to implement the notice of proposed rule making now, we would be on par in many ways with Foreign Countries. However, were probably 16 to 18 months away from doing that and they will still move forward. Its going to be that kind of back and forth. But there are some reasons for it. Faa should be congratulated for moving to the point that it is. As we said, there are still some very critical things that need to happen to keep in the game. Thank you, senator. I think its true were on par when these rules get adopted 18 to 24 months from now, where we truly lag from behind is the future. Beyond visual line of sight flying is coming europeans are getting ready for it, were not so much. I wonder, miss gilligan, a couple things weve done in congress, in partnership with faa, within faa create centers of excellence on things we dont quite yesterday understand. Composite, manufacturing materials and approval on products like 787, so to keep the faa up to date they created before they did that a center of excellence, same center of excellence now in existence with the faa in the lead on biofuels. How are you going to get a drop in jet fuel. Do we need center of excellence to help faa on the technical side get answers in advance so as the market continues to develop those questions are being addressed the research is being done so to speak . Yes, senator. Actually weve gotten good support from congress in the last appropriations bill we were actually given additional appropriations for the purposes of establishing a center of excellence. That process is under way. The applications have been received. They are under review. We expect to name the center of excellence before the end of this fess cal year and the administrator challenged us to do that even sooner, as soon as we possibly k its in part we see not only at the test site but at the center of excellence we can frame these Technology Issues and some of the other challenges and get the best minds in academia helping us solve those. I think that last phrase is key, best minds in academia to help you. Thank you. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, senator cantwell. Id like to call on the senator. Thank you miss chairwoman. Miss gilligan faa guidelines for recreational drones id like to go through them and ask for your comment. My understanding is that a drone must weigh less than 55 pounds, be flying below 400 feet visual line of sight, must not be flying carelessly or recklessly not interfere with manned Aircraft Operations and not fly near an airport. Importantly there appears to be no speed limit for recreational drones and no prohibition on flying over people. So my question for you is, although the notice of proposed rule making i think is progress, what are we doing at the 400 foot and down level and who has jurisdiction . The notice, sir, is directed toward operators in commercial recreation. Hobby and recreational are in accordance with recreation bill jeefr seen by a Community Standard. Were working with American Modelers Association for them to serve in that function. So they actually have a set of operating expectations for their members. Will they have they do not. Under the reauthorization it was pfl set forward to be a Community Standard as opposed to regulation. Is this is preemption at play . In other words, if a mayor wants to set aside a mayor can decide a mayor can decide to use a county park house they wish with parks department, city council. You can see no golfing no frisbee, no dogs, dogs here, dogs not there this is a passive park. They have jurisdiction over the land. This goes to professors testimony. My question is did we just preempt local decisionmakers from making choices with respect to where recreational drones are allowed and where they are not . The congress preempted authority to the airspace for federal government for a long time. The faa is the sole entity responsible for the airspace. We do consider that to be from the ground through as high as aircraft operates. Now that we have commercial Space Operations as well. I just want to get clear on this. There would be no prohibition on flying 54 pound drone 10 feet above a ball field as fast as you want. Because our statute and 2012 reauthorization preempts local decisionmaker from deciding whats allowable in public space and whats not. Is that correct . Id have to ask our lawyer to check the reading of the law. Whats more important there are tremendous people using these vehicles for Recreational Purposes who are not well informed about their responsibilities. Thats why we and themologying community and manufacturers are doing the outreach were doing. Several of the manufacturers are providing information in the packaging so that people who buy these understand they have a responsibility if they are going to operate in the airspace. Professor did you want to comment on that . I was taken by your citing of the Supreme Court case, obvious for landowners to have full enjoyment of the land he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. It seeps to me this question of at what sort of elevation a landowner Public Entity or private individual ceases to have full control over their land, its an open question. It seems to me its still being adjudicated. Is that correct . Id say we are being forced thanks to Unmanned Aircraft what we could not afford to figure out in much detail before. No one could argue as a landowner i have a right to stop United Airlines from flying over my property at 30,000 feet. The cosby ruling and other rulings, airspace is public resource. The question is how low . Clearly it doesnt include airspace two inches above the ground in my backyard. That would be ridiculous. Do you think this should be articulated through law making process rule making, Community Standards or my concern is if we try to pick a specific limit, for example, you have control up to 100 feet, then you almost invite people to sit outside in ways that might be problematic i think in that sense better to have general reasonable expectation of privacy isnt specific courts. Courts. That has worked well. I just have one final question, with your indulgence, for miss gilligan. I guess my bake question, are model aircraft, should we be treating model aircrafts and drones synonymously . It seems to me that some of the kind of policy infrastructure didnt really envision drones as they are emerging. Maybe im wrong here. When i hear model aircraft i dont picture a 54 pound object moving at 100 miles an hour. Maybe im still catching up myself. Can you just comment on that very briefly . I think what we are seeing, as you highlighted is that the people many people who are buying Unmanned Systems are not what we would historically have considered modelers. Modelers were generally aviators, they came in because of a love of aviation. They wanted to experiment with the physics of flight and build their airplanes and those kinds of things. We have a different part of the Community Joining us now. We and the Modeling Community are working hard to make them understand that they have aviation responsibilities that go beyond being able to buy this really interesting toy that they want to use in their backyard. Thank you very much. Thank you. Senator moran. Chairwoman, thank you very much. Miss gilligan, the faas proposed rules, theres no requirement for uaspiratoreuas aoperator of the equipment, ensure safe and operators can safely utilize them. How are those issues going to be addressed in the future. Senator on air worthiness, authorization bill authorized secretary to make a finding there was no need for air worthiness certificate if certain other criteria were met. Those were related to speed, weight, and location of operation. What the rule does is subscribe those criteria and provide that limitation that is consistent with the statute in such a way we felt that met the expectation there would not be a need for air worthiness certification for a particular set of standards. Im sorry, i forget the other one you asked about. The operator worthiness of equipment. So there is an operator testing