Transcripts For CSPAN3 Politics Public Policy Today 20141014

Concept of the militia is that it is everybody or virtually everybody in the body politic. One of the more recent discussions of the militia concept i found in the d. C. Heller case, an individual Second Amendment case, however there was some dicta in there discussing the militia in its collective sense, and in there, the Supreme Court stated that unlike armies and navies, the militia is assumed by article 1 to already be in existence. Although the militia consists of all able bodied men the federal organized militia may consist of a subset of them, so there is a distinction between organized militia and unorganized militia, and the type of militia im going to discuss today is the organized militia, which is the National Guard. And this particular distinction between organized and unorganized militia is carried through into each state. Under state law, for example in maryland, where im a judge advocate in maryland as well, in the Maryland National guard, you can see that the state code defines the organized militia as the nonfederalized National Guard. The Inactive National Guard which is basically folks that have not yet all the way transitioned out of the guard. Theyre on a roster and can be recalled. And then something called the Maryland Defense force which i have a slide about at the very end which is a nonfederalized militia, and then, again, in maryland, for example, ablebodied individuals, which is everybody else thats not members of the previous organizations, would be the unorganized militia. So what you have is basically you have two National Guards. When brad earlier was talking about the federal government response and it only happens after the state is exhausted, well, the National Guard is both. For example, i have a commission from the president of the United States and i have a commission from the governor of maryland. So its this dual status that makes the National Guard a unique organization as well as a unique military force in the country. So that on the left of that slide, you can see where the organized militia is trained and appointed, et cetera, and has federal recognition, okay, but is governed by title 32 as far as command and control. And i have a command and control chart in the next slide or two that will explain this. It is under the command and control of the president. And the National Guard members flip back and forth between these two statuses depending on how their orders are cut. So basically if you one of the touchstone references is the perpage case. Basically perpage talked about the hat concept. You have your state militia hat, your civilian hat, your federal hat, and you can only wear one at a time so that when you are for example, i am on title 10 orders, so i have moved out of my title 32 status even though i still maintain it but its basically inactive status so that the governor of maryland, for example, has no command and control over me. The president has command and control over me. Now, since theres always an exception, there is something called dual status which you may read about in connection with disasters with a dual status commander, and that essentially is the president was given Statutory Authority to allow a member of the National Guard to be placed on active duty without losing his or her state status and vice versa, conversely, can detail a members of the active component to duty with the National Guard who can accept a commission in the National Guard without losing his or her regular appointment. But thats something that takes a secretary of defense approval. The president delegated that authority to the secretary of defense, and it happens, and we have a whole process set up for when that happens, but normally speaking those are individuals who are commanding in a unity of effort mode for a Disaster Response or for some other event like a National Security event. Okay, so what we have is the command and control scheme currently is on this side you have the state command and control on your title 32 which is the governor is in command through the adjunct general to the army National Guard or the ang. These dotted lines are coordination lines. Then you have the president through the secretary of defense and the ngb is not a command and control headquarters but its in this federal line as a coordination element, a joint activity of dod, and then youve got ngb over here. Now, when you have and then i didnt have room on that slide, but, you know, for the combatant forces, for example, northern command, they are also under the president agenci president s command and control. These are separate and distinct chains of command so that, for example, the president or the Combatant Commander or whoever cannot exert command and control over nonfederalized forces and vice versa. Any nonfederalized officer cannot exert command and control over federalized forces. When an individual is in dual status, ill show you how that works in a second. Okay. If youre in dual status, what happens is you still have your separate and distinct chains of command, but youve got they centralize in one individual. This is one individual who has is placed on active duty or has remained on active duty and been detailed to the guard and who has a commission in the state, and well call this notional state b so that as a tucks of the commission in that state has authority over the National Guard forces from that state. No other state because at present time there is no mechanism to become a member of more than one state National Guard at a time. So we dont have regional command and control authority. We have command and control authority down to one state, and then from the president we have command and control authority through the dual status in his title 10 hat to federal forces. And then if there are other states involved like a multistate operation, for example, and other, for example, in hurricane sandy, states sent their forces into other states to assist. The command and control over those forces still rests with the originating state, and when im talking about command and control the authority to courtmartial, to relief, to promote. But as an agreement the forces sent from state a to state b agree to cooperate with state b and do what they want so, for example, the dual status commander can tell forces from outside the state, look, i want you to go to the west side of town and set up a water distribution point. You know, and its all a unity of effort type operation. So that and so some of the legal issues that arise is, for example, i mentioned earlier posse comitatus does not apply to the nonfederalized National Guard but it does apply to federalized guardsmen and title 10 individuals. If theres a civil disturbance and theres some kind of Law Enforcement action taken by the troops, then you have to make sure that the authority is originating out of this chain of command and not this chain of command. So, you know, for lawyers, there are a number of issues that this raises just as far as separating the concepts and making sure that all of these concepts are applied in the right manner. So now what id like to do is talk about the level of effort that is presently being applied. Okay. Each one of those stars is three National Guard facilities, so the guard is very, very highly decentralized. It is rooted in just about every community in the u. S. So it is physically proximate to almost any incident that could occur, and as a result of that, every year the National Guard bureau keeps track of statistics. This is for fy 13 im sorry, let me preface this by saying the charts the numbers that im going to show you have been rolled out because the National Guard can provide assistance to state authorities in a couple different ways. All right. Youve got in title 32 as a primary purpose of the operation, in other words the guard would be ordered to duty to provide a response to, for example, the oil spill, you know, the deepwater horizon or a hurricane. That would be the primary purpose of that operation. Thats either through a statute, a preexisting statute such as that that authorizes the civil support teams, or its by the secretary of defense authority. In title 32 the secretary of defense has to approve the use of the National Guard in title 32. The second category is as an incidental benefit of training or military operations. For example, if we have a Truck Company that needs training on how to drive trucks, it is it makes more sense if theyre driving trucks that they can also, for example, haul goods and water or whatever to benefit perhaps a relief evident than to just take their empty trucks and drive around in circles on a military base and benefit nobody but themselves. So a lot of assistance is provided as an incident to training or operations, and the distinction there is that it has to be a training operation. The primary purpose is training and the incidental purpose is the assistance even though to the recipients of that assistance, that may be everything in the world to them. But, again, for lawyers, you know, you have to carefully make sure that its couched in the right terms because otherwise you run into fiscal issues when youre using training money for nontraining purposes. Then finally you have state active duty, and thats per state law, and each state law is a little different, and normally speaking the troops are using federal equipment. Theyre wearing their uniform so it still says u. S. Army, u. S. Air force, but they are not federal actors and they have no federal status, and theres complete control by the state chain of command so that the federal for example the regulations that would govern them if they were in title 32 do not apply in state active duty. So with that in mind, i want to show you some numbers which may astonish you mike, i apologize but were at the end of our time. Okay. If we could put a cap on it there. Absolutely. And then certainly be available for questions. Ladies and gentlemen, your moderators time management skills stink. We are literally at the end of our class, but our final speaker is colonel dawn zoldi. I would ask you, if i may, for those of you who can stay, afford her the courtesy of at least five minutes of your time, and then i will ask the Panel Members, weve eaten up our q a time. I will certainly remain and i would ask Panel Members to remain at the conclusion for those who would have questions so you might come forward and ask them. Our final speaker a skol dawn zoldi. Dawn is the staff judge advocate at the u. S. Air force academy. Shes been a judge advocate for 21 years. She is an associate professor, assistant professor, associate, at the u. S. Air forces a de s as an adjunct at the judge advocate generals school. Dawn is going to speak to you about the emerging, controversial, and important policies and potential statutory authorities as they relate to the domestic operational employment of drones. Dawn . Thank you so much. Thanks for your patience. Here i thought id have ten minutes of fame and i have five, so i will speak quickly. So to tie this all together, we heard about the strategic overarching concept of the interagency contribution to disaster operations, and then we heard about the dud role. We heard about one component of the dod, total forces National Guard and what i will focus on is one particular asset that, as mr. Mchale said, is controversial, uavs or what we in the aforce calls rpas, remotely piloted aircraft. Now, why am i calling them that . Because youre probably sitting there, is she talking about drones . I dont use that word, okay, because in the air force thats heresy to use the word drone. Unmanned aerial vehicle. We call them rp as, remotely piloted aircraft. In 2010 the air force formalized rpa training and made rpa pilots rated pilots just like the ones that fly manned aircraft, and words matter, and that makes a big difference because theyre not just unmanned. Theyre actually piloted by certifiy eied pilots so thats important. What can rpas bring to the fight for lack of a better term in a Disaster Response . I can tell you that they werent used in sandy, but i can also tell you because i was part of that effort as was colonel noyes, that they were used during the california rim wildfires, and it was one of the first events where those were used, and it was pretty exciting because for that particular effort, the fires were so persistent, so widespread, that putting a helicopter or a manned aircraft up over those fires was extremely dangerous. Not only that, but the loiter time for those manned aircraft was very minimal whereas an rpa can provide persistent coverage. What were talking about here is iaa in the military, which is incident awareness and assessment. So this was incredible. It actually changed the entire battle rhythm of the firefighters in california. They could actually work through the night and through the day for the first time and it really helped put that fire for lack of a better term in a box. So rpas are one of those assets that really have a unique role and also a great future i think in this particular area. Now, im going to talk for a second about privacy and security because i think when we talk rpas, thats the thing that jumps out at people. Thats the biggest concern. Okay, youre looking at the wildfire. What else are you looking at . What else are you videotaping up there . So lets talk about that for a second because what you need to understand about rpas are that there are very high level approval authorities, and Robert Salesses can be the first to attest to this. Unless youre training on a military base, if youre doing something with an rpa its going to be secdef approval. Thats how high the approval level is to utilize one of these particular assets. The other thing you need to understand is not only do they have to be authorized by the proper approval authority, they also have to, of course, suppco with the law. When i talk about the law here, im talking about in particular intelligence oversight policies and procedures, and those derive out of executive order 12333, and the dod has implemented that through a directive. Intelligence oversight is basically what protects american citizens from essentially being spied on. It protects privacy. And theres four pillars i call them thats part of this intelligence oversight regime. And thats collection, retention, desem nation, and oversight. And so the intelligence oversight policies that apply to all these operations, even for Something Like california rim wildfire and iaa would apply the intelligence oversight policies. How are you collecting, where are you collecting, who is getting to see it, how long are you keeping it, where is it going and, oh, if you dont do any of that right, there is an oversight regime that goes all the way up to congress and, of course, to the president. So thats the kind of protections that are in place when we utilize these particular assets. I dont know if i have like one minute left or what you can take five. I can take five more . Okay, great. Thats my pitch on rpas, and i think the great benefit that they can actually add to these kind of responses, but since i have five minutes, i will take those five minutes to talk very briefly about emerging legislation and i think how it could actually impact the ability to perform these operations with rpas. Theres 86 bills on the floor last year in various states, 42 states have introduced 86 different bills. I dont do public math but that means more than a couple bills per state for some of them, okay . Now, primarily these apply to Law Enforcement, and what they tell you is they prohibit the collection of information or evidence with the use of an rp a. Thats the general premise here. Theres exceptions, of course. The largest one is with a warrant. Another one that would be highly relevant to the arena is with in cases of imminent threat to life or imminent danger to property. Thats a big one, too. The reason why i even mention this at all, and i know some of you pointing out there have heard my talk earlier at the fundamentals of counterterrorism symposium, the reason why its important is because, you know, it if these are passed, they could really have effects on not only dod training but certainly my colleague over here, the National Guard, unless theres an exception in state status, these laws will apply, and the guard actually has a number of these assets. So its an Interesting Development in the law and how it will ultimately affect a whole myriad of operations, including dsca operations is up in the air but i think its something that is worth noting and worth continuing to explore, which i plan to do. So without further ado, i know im standing between you and lunch and thats a very dangerous place to be. So thank you for your time and attention and ill go ahead and hand it back over to mr. Mchale. Terrific, grace under pressure. Weve been granted a fiveminute reprie reprieve. For those of you who have personal commitments and must leave, feel free to do so. Id ask you to file to the outside so you dont block the camera coverage. For those of you who do have questions, we can stay five more minutes and would welcome those questions. Please come forward to the microphone, ask your question, and direct it toward, if possible, a specific panel member, and then well bring this to a conclusion joe tells me at 12 40. Questions . Good afternoon. Thank you for your presentations. Michael dougherty from raytheon. Busy trying to create a Public Safety Broadband Network that would bring communications to First Responders. I dont know if you tracked that as parted of your jobs. If you have, what do you think the biggest challenge might be for bringing Interoperable Communications that can withstand disasters to state and local and a national network. If you have no opinion, its been nice talking to you. If i may, ill direct that initially to bob sal less ses and then mike noyes. Bob because he has the overall responsibility. Mike because you may or may not be familiar with the package of communications options. Im not completely familiar with the issue but i know this has been in work for a long time and certainly i know that the National Guard in particular have a tremendous capability for interoperability comes. But youre talking beyond what dod does, into local communities, into other federal agencies that may be communicating at that level whether its Law Enforcement, fbi, or other organizations. That im not familiar with and i apologize for that. The National Guard has an interest, of course, in being able to communicate with all the whole spectrum of First Responders, and i know that our civil support teams have a hardware and Software Package that allows basically anybody to talk to anybody because whatever frequency or modulation the broadcast is received in, it can then be translated and shot out on a different channel, for example, so that the different First Responders from the different agencies can its transparent to them. They think theyre talking directly to each other. So thats really all i know about the system, but Interoperable Communications, i know theres been a lot of work done on that because of the various incompatible systems that have been in use. Within the first few days of the response to Hurricane Katrina, one of the top five unmet requirements was inoperable a lack of Interoperable Communications, and as a result of that, the National Guard went forward and bought 80some packages of a patch system that happens to be produced by this gentlemans company where you can take a hand held motorola a Police Officer might have and a radio that might be used by the 82nd airborne or the National Guard. You plug them through this patch, and that allows Interoperable Communications from a civilian First Responder to a National Guardsman or a title 10 military personnel. The csts have a band with a similar patch system designed by nav air where you can plug in almost any radio to that system and by patch it will convert that radios communication in a way thats come patible with all other Communications Platforms even though they might technically be quite dissimilar. That was a lawyers answer. I think its called the joint Interagency Communications center. After Hurricane Katrina i was briefed on it bought about 80 of these packages from this gentlemans company. There are others out there as well. Its a competitive marketplace but its quite remarkable. A motorola a Police Officer might have, you plug that into this system, the original one was an acu 1000 and you can communicate with all other systems that are plugged into that patch even though they might be on completely different frequencies and completely different hardware. This gentleman . Good morning. Im james eronus, assistance attorney general in commonwealth of northern marietta islands. I notice that the marianna islands and American Samoa have not joined the Emergency Management assistance compact and aside from legislation in the two territories, are there any other hurdles that would prevent them from joining that . I believe that im sure there are attorneys in the room who could if there are any attorneys in the room who can answer it better, please do. I believe its purely a legislative impediment. The only thing i would offer is theres nothing to prevent two territories from establishing mutual aid agreements. The nature of a compact between states is what requires congressional approval in order to avoid some unintend consequences. But i dont think theres anything that would prevent territories from establishing arrangements or appropriate agreements with others to do it and from a practical perspective of course, who would be providing that assistance. For states its one thing because theyre contiguous geographic geographically. Were talking about the federal highway system moving things or aircraft moving things in. I think where the territories are concerned, its just a different logistical challenge that makes those sorts of agreements potentially less useful. To my regret, this will have to be our last question. Hi. How have the recent economic struggles impacted how states are relying on federal support and the ability of the federal government to give support . Here is the bottom line. Obviously there is a lot of downward pressure economically at budgets at all level of government, and so states and their political subdivisions, we have seen an increase in requests for federal assistance both inside and outside of the disaster declarations to help offset the impact on budgets and i will give you a great example. When it snows and theres a need to do removal of snow and ice from the roads, one would expect that most states and local governments would plan in the budget for that and so as a policy matter, we generally dont provide assistance for road treatment unless theres been a record or near record snowfall. That policy is meeting with a lot of resirsance right now because even below the level of record and near record snowfalls, local governments are struggling to handle their snow removal budgets and ice removal budgets and to take bobs point about climate change, we are beginning to see ice storms and other sorts of unusual weather events in places where those things didnt happen before. Those communities are not budgeting for that. Theres always a degree of the unexpected, but to the extent these things being reoccurring and the community is not reoccurring enough you sort of do an annual budget enough but recurring enough you have to confront it periodically, that will continue to drive requests. At the same time state and local governments are seeking additional funding from the federal government, the federal governments budget is contracting as well and theres a lot of competition and demand for dollars in the appropriations process and appropriately regardless of what side of the aisle theyre on, appropriators are looking at emergency funds that sit unused and waiting as a contingency and saying maybe thats not the best place to invest scarce dollars. That continues to be a challenge and i think it will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Our system of checks and balances works pretty well but in a domestic crisis, there are problems. There are challenges that arise when someone says who is in charge . What weve tried to do during the course of this panel is present to you a better understanding of how the various agencies within our federal system of government and within the interagency process coordinate to work within the context of a system of checks and balances but to have unity of effort in achieving a lifesaving and timely response to a domestic event. Thank you all so very much for your time. [ applause ] jin us tuesday on cspan3 for programs focusing on health care issues. Well show you remarks from cvs pharmacys president , a Senate Hearing on Health Care Systems around the world, and a house hearing on medicare fraud. All starting tuesday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. Tonight a Louisiana Senate debate between incumbent democrat Mary Landrieu and republicans congressman bill cassidy and retired colonel rob maness. Louisiana has an open primary system in which all candidates run against ep other with the majority winning the election. If a candidate fails to get 50 of the vote, theres a runoff. You can see tonights debate at 8 00 eastern on cspan2, and you can also post your comments on facebook and twitter. On cspan an arkansas Senate Debate between mark pryor and republican congressman tom cotton. Its a second debate in two days. Here is some ads running in arkansas. Im mark pryor and i approve this message. Im the director of a 124hor emergency Domestic Violence shelter. We have to do something to break the cycle of violence and tom cotton is not doing anything to help. Congressman cotton voted against protecting women and children from Domestic Violence. He was the only republican or democrat from the state of arkansas to vote this way. He voted to cut the funding to shelters. Theres a big difference between mark pryor and tom cotton. One wants to protect women and children. The other doesnt. Im mark pryor and i approve this message. Im courtney. I have never been political but its hard to ignore the senate race. The more i read, the more im concerned about tom cotton. Did you know he voted against equal pay for women . And he thinks women should be charged more for health care than men. Cotton was also the only arkansas congressman to vote twice against helping women who are victims of Domestic Violence. It makes you wonder, whats cotton got against women . Im tom cotton and i approve this message. My husband and i started this business on a leap of faith. We have everything from a body shop guy to mechanics to a cleaning crew to the dispatch, the drivers. Our dream now is survival. Obamacare has already raised the premiums. Its already costing us a fortune. Its not only hurt our business, its hurt our employees. It was supposed to make health care a lot more affordable. It has done everything but make health care affordable. Next year we might not even be able to afford coverage at all. Our hands are tied. It is frustrating to realize that your own senator had cast the deciding vote on obamacare. We told him personally how this would affect our business and our employees. I wish senator pryor had listened to us when we told him how obamacare would affect your business and i wish he would have voted against it, but he didnt. Recent polling has listed this race as a tossup. You can see tonights debate live at 8 00 eastern on cspan. Here are just a few of the comments weve recently received from our viewers. I am a nurse, and i just watched your segment on cspan regarding our troops going to liberia in regards to the ebola virus and helping out over there. And im okay with that. However, i really do believe that the only way to keep americans safe is to prevent anybody coming over from liberia to the United States, and we dont have a vaccine yet for this ebola virus, and if an american does become ill and dies because of it, its just not fair to the American People and its not doing us a service and keeping us safe. Im a retired nurse practitioner, and i must say in listening to especially the medical experts speak on tv to the american public, im shocked at one completely inaccurate comment that with viruses one concern about contagiousness is that a patient in some viruses can be the most contagious before, say, the day before they even show symptoms, and i checked with enough local colleagues to find out, no, no, youre right, that hasnt changed. It sounds like even lay people are confronting that misinformation. Whats happened with the ebola virus so far proves that the United States is not prepared to deal with this in an efficient way, that Homeland Security is not efficient, which weve known that, and that the Transportation Security Administration did not do its job and the hospital to which this man went did not do its job and it seems to me that people from dangerous areas should be either not allowed to come to the United States or should be quarantined or should be allowed to put in a special camp or at least forced to undergo a medical examination upon getting off the plane if theyre not going to be prevented from coming. And continue to let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. Call us at 2026263400. Email us at comments cspan. Org or send us a tweet cspan comments. Now, part of the annual conference hosted by the Airline Pilots association here in washington. Officials from the federal Aviation Administration and other agencies discuss Unmanned Aircraft safety, information protection, and the need for global flight tracking and threat assessment following two Malaysia Airlines crashes. This is almost an hour. Okay. If we can go ahead and take our seats, well get started. Now i would like to welcome our webcast audience to join us this morning. Thank you for joining in with us. Lets go ahead and begin our next panel. Okay. As i mentioned earlier, im going to change my role certainly a little bit and im going to moderate a discussion with our friends from the faa, transport canada and the International Civil Aviation Organization otherwise known as icao. Often its been said that safety is never an end state. Those of us in the safety business know it is everchanging and our work is never finished. We can never delude ourselves into thinking weve got all of the answers. I know most of you know that. No flight is ever routine or just like the previous one. To some degree theres always a unique set of conditions and circumstances that present a challenge to an otherwise safe and uneventful flight. We have to ensure the overall system is able to detect threats and alleviate high risk. Industry and regulators around the world are working towards a common vision whether it is in areas appropriate for the use of safety data, Safety Management systems, voluntary safety reportings of reporting programs or the safe integration of Unmanned Aerial Systems or as we like to refer to them, remotely piloted aircraft. There is always still work to be done. So id like to hear the perspectives from our regulators and our colleagues from icao and these subjects and what the industry has been doing right along with their vision for the future in area that is still need to be addressed, not only here in north america, throughout the world. I would like to introduce you to this very distinguished panel. To mi left is mr. John hickey. He is the deputy associate administrator for aviation safety at the federal Aviation Administration. To his left is mr. Martin eley, director general, Civil Aviation at transport canada. On the far left is mr. Mitchell fox, chief Flight Operations at icao. You can see their full biographies in the back of your program. So lets go ahead and begin. Okay. Im going to cut right to the chase. Were already hearing about a 200pound remotely piloted helicopter that is applied to enter the National Airspace system. So, john, how soon before amazon will be delivering a book on my doorstep with a vehicle like that . Well, ill leave the marketing on amazon. Com to jeff bezos, but let me just sort of walk you through some of the steps that the faa has taken today. The administrator has made it very clear that regarding the entry of uass into the system is going to be done in a prudent, stepbystep basis. With safety at the foremost in our minds. Today we have, as you know, congressionally directed six key test site areas that were going to sort of get a lot of new information from. Four of them have been stood up. Other two are not far behind being stood up. We also have issued the very first commercial type approved restricted Category Aircraft in the arctic. Theyve been operating up there. And weve been very engaged in providing exemptions to a limited group of commercial operations. As a result of the congressionally mandated section, what they call section 333 in the reauthorization bill. So theres a lot of activities were doing, but theres also a lot of stuff remaining. We really dont have standards that are appropriate yet for uass. I think many of you know that we will hopefully have a proposal for the small uas rollout later this year. And theres always some of the Critical Technologies that still need to be solved like sense and avoid. And so i think to some degree its not going to be as soon as some people tend to think it is. Okay. Interesting. In the rule you will put out later this year and response you will put out later this year, do you think you will achieve some standards at that time . Or is that still a work in progress . Well, remember, its a small u. S. Role. Right. And it is only an nprm. I dont think by virtue of the nprm itself we will have developed standards but there are activities going on in the rtca special committee, to look at standards, look at the ability to comply with prop 91 to see and avoid. Very good. Martin, what about in canada . Where are we with uas integration up there . Integration is probably a long way away, to answer that part of the question. In one sense we were lucky in 1996 we put in place a rule to allow us to authorizeu avs. The bad news is that did not have standards just the general ability to issue authority. So those have certainly taken off in the sense that three years ago we shipped out about 150 of those. Last year it was 950. So clearly volume is increasing. We learned a lot along the way. A lot of those operations are commercial. The challenge is being able to put a fence around it. So a lot of them were dealt with individually. Based on that experience, we got some guidance that were going to be putting out this fall which will help our staff deal with them. They will be less individual but also the industry will have a better sense of what our expectations are in terms of what documentation you need, how do you justify it, how do you show you have the right mitigations in place. We also have a working group. We have a long term plan, four phases. First phase is below 25 kilograms within line of sight which is the relatively easy piece even though theres work to be done on that. I think in that general area theres been some discussion with the faa and were in the sim type of place. The operation is less complex. We have a general sense of where we are. The biggest next step is line of sight, and i think thats a challenge, not because of authority, but the industry is not there with solutions for the smaller vehicles. The longer term faces are really getting into the bigger vehicles without limits eventually. Thats some years away. We are in the process of trying to determine on what sort of schedule we can get some rulemaking out there at least for that lower group. So im hoping probably within the next year or two we will have something in place which is probably going to be pretty much in line with the faas time scale. Are you two is the u. S. And canada, do you have an open dialogue between your two agencies on this subject . The answer is i think yes in a lot of areas. We have very different rule structures in first place so it doesnt mean the rule is going to be the same. Im not sure if youre aware there is a counter u. S. Initiative called the rc kc. Anyway, its a very high level driven on all sorts of subjects. There was one item for us in Civil Aviation in the first phase of that and that was actually on the initial stages uavs. In that form there has been, certainly on the technical level people are talking all the time. Mitch, bring in the global approach to this. What are you seeing at icao and give us a perspective of how rpa is developing worldwide . Very much like my colleagues from National Regulatory authorities, were taking a step by step approach. In the blueprint we see ahead for this type of technology, what were trying to do to the extent possible is mirror what we do in terms of our International Approaches to four rpa operations to what we do for manned operations. So in that respect the uas study group, which by the way very soon is going to be up leveled to a full technical panel, weve been working ahead on looking at what sort of requirements would be necessary for the issuance of an air operator certificate for rpa operations. Very much in line with manned operations. What type of requirements will remote pilots need to meet, the sort of annex one International Licensing requirements as well as what are the airworthiness requirements for the vehicles themselves. And thats been the major focus of our work. Previously back in about 2012 we came out with some enabling standards. Theyre very preliminary in nature. The first one is aircraft registration. Actually recognizing remotely piloting aircraft as aircraft in the international context, and then in annex two, the rules of the air which apply universally, especially over high seas air space, was the initially enabling rules that would allow for one state to authorize another states operation with a remotely piloted aircraft into their air space. Those are only initial things, so again the work is going to be focused on the pilot license areas, the air operator certificate, the airworthiness requirements. So our uas study group has been working away for the last two or three years. In march of next year they expect to roll out the rpa guidance manual. Thats the first step leading towards the eventual development of international standards, and from the 23rd to the 25th of march, 2015, well be having a global symposium to start to discuss the impact of our rpas in International Operations in and in line with the aviation safety bloc upgrades. The eventual integration into knob segregated air spous for International Operation but thats a longterm process. Were looking at the First International standards in respect of licensing, the air operator certificate, airworthiness certification, and some enabling standards in annex 10 in about the 2018 time frame, and then well be looking for biannual updates of those standards as the technologies mature. Certainly as john mentioned, sense and avoid is an issue that were looking at through the study group and, again, that work will continue in the panel. Good. Very interesting. You know, the two Big International initiatives, of course, is rpa, uas, and, of course, next gen. Id be interested in your thoughts, are rpas and uass, should that be an integral part of next gen or are rpas and uas just another operator within next gen . I guess im asking, do you see this as being integrated in consideration as we move forward with next gen or do we just leave the development of rpas over here and they will just be another user of next gen . First of all, when you look at uass and i will use the phraseology we use here in the u. S. , uass, there is a focus on uass in and of themselves because of the significant challenges they have both technically, privacy, and many other issues, but its impossible for us to look at next gen without also considering the impact of uas. At this point in time theres not a lot of involvement or a lot of focus on uas as part of the next gen environment because as my colleagues have mentioned, were still many years away from what you would see as a safe integration in the very busiest air space in our system. Were just not there yet, and it will be a number of years. But as we go further down the road and as they get closer and closer to doing that, there will be a bigger and bigger focus on it under the next gen environment. Martin, can you comment on that . Im with john on that. Just to add a little bit, i think the bottom line is if we want to innovate in the air space, they have to meet the same safety standard. Theres certainly work going on. Theres work going on on microversions if they get to a point where uavs of any size have that sort of capability. Not to say there arent other issues. It would finally get there and just be another user. Akbree wigree with john. We need to be acome sdated. Mitch . What do you think . Very much in line with what john and martin said. The Aviation System block upgrades, really, its a systems architecture. If youre going to take a systems architecture approach to really the future of air navigation, you have to consider all of the players that are going to be in that system. So as we move ahead from block ze zero, which were currently in, to block one, block two and block three, there are modules of those block upgrades which specifically apply to aviation or remotely flied aircraft. Ive heard all three of you really underscore the poerimpore of safety. What other steps do you think you can take to assure the public that safety is the prime directive here in rpa integration versus the very Technical Work that has to be done. What can we do to assure them that there is safety out there. Let me start out with a relatively short answer. By taking very slow, deliberative steps. Before letting uess into the more busy air space. There is a perception that we are imminently set for uas. Youd be on a commercial Airlines Flight and youre going to see a uae fly by. Were not going to see that any time soon. I think if the public sees, you know, that this is not happening and we publicly, the faa, and weve been very much out there letting people know, let the public know, that we will not allow these uass come into the system until were completely sure that theyre safe. I think thats a great step to educate in the public. Yeah. Okay. The uas industry demonstrated that theyre very safe. The short term, the biggest challenge, is the ininformed users. People that dont realize that even if theyre commercial, they have some responsibleties. Those are the people that are popping up on the approach to the airport. Theres no consequence to that. Yeah, mitch from the international perspective. Do you see john and martin alluded to educating people. The commercial interests that want to do this and may not efble be aware that there need to be stabd ards put in place. Are you seeing that on the international front, as well . Absolutely. We had a certain number of people in that study group that are representative of ill call it the rpe industry. And we have sort of the main corps of the International Aviation today, the regulators, the industry and the pilots, also, on the uas study group. It was a matter to some extent educating the rpa industry on what are the expectations for safety in our international environment. Especially if youre going to operate in unseg regated air space. We take the robust safety systems, including Management Systems that we utilize today in manned operations and we apply those to the extent possible for remotelypiloted Aircraft Operations. Thank you very much for that segway. Thats the area i want to go into now, Safety Management system. I think ill start with you, martin. What have you learned in canada. Youve been there for a while. What lessons have you learned, good and bad . Weve learned many lessons, is the short answer. In 2009, we made a conscious decision to pause. We also had employees and werent sure if they were ready. Again, it was perhaps the education piece. What is that like, in reality . Also, the other big piece, its hard to go in there with traditional inspection tools. We did a lot of work on that and that has also been a big learning experience. Those two things have started to coless and weve started the discussion a bit. Even though we have 95 of our flight ops with passenger miles. We see the need to cover all elements of the industry. The organizations that if youre going to be in the system, the system needs to be played. Thats where we eluded to it. Have you given us an update on where sns is in the u. S. . Were actually quite further along than maybe some people might see. And martin really brought up a number of key components that i think is very much transcends to the United States. We dont have a rule yet. We dont have a mandate. We are in the process of doing the rulemaking. And, but, instead of waiting for the rule to come out, we have developed a Pilot Program with dozens of airlines in the United States which comprise, as martin said, well over 90 of the traveling public. And what were seeing is, were seeing a variety of different maturity levels of the sns system and a variety of the different airlines. But what is really important about sns . And this is, what i think is exciting is martin alluded to it. It is gloing to fund. Ly change the surveillance for an airline that does not have an sns requires a certain level of oversight that you might suspect. But if an airline is doing all the things of an sns, collecting data, analyzing data, developing safety enhancement, implementing them, checking the effectiveness of them. If an airline is doing that, the faa doesnt have to have the same level of oversight that we did without it. And then we can put our resources on the more critical areas of the safety system. We also are developing our own internal sms system. Our staffing is based on riskbased management, decision making. Many of the other decisions that were doing internally in the faa is fundamentally based on riskbased decision making, which is a key component of sms. Very interesting. A lot has been said about culture. I certainly hear in some of the meetings that i go to, well, relations between employees and their interaction and their reported voluntary data is management labor issue. But honestly, just culture, i think, is what brings good data to the table. Where do you see the regulators role in promoting just culture to the at the operator level. And getting that mind set over that the operator really needs to focus in on that kind of environment. What can you do as a regulator on that . Well, i think the faa has had a long, great history of promoting involuntary reporting systems. We were experiencing quite a bit of access in the yiet. We created this government Industry Collaboration what ive auchb seen is when youre looking at different kinds of data, is where you see the disagreements. Between one group versus another. And as a result of the commercial Aviation Safety Team activity, as a major contributor, weve seen the accident rate drop 30 . So what weve seen now is increased voluntarily reported information. Remember, you other wise will never see that data if we dont provide a culture and an environment where people feel comfortable with submitting that information. And have you had success in promoting that culture . I believe weve had success. And, as with every industry, people embrace things quickly. And theres others that take a little longer. Theres two aspects from the industry point of view. Its very clear to us. They want that culture to exist. Thats where it works. If that doesnt happen at senior level, then people are obviously not comfortable and it doesnt work. If you ask what our role is, one of the things that we can do as government is to be a bit of a role model in the sense if youre talking about developing trust, its the old issue, whos going to go first. So, as government, we have the opportunity to take that role and save the industry. Were doing our best to trust you and hopefully develop that trust sort of between the companies and ourselves. So quite a part from the systems. People say weve got this problem. We dont know what were doing about it yet. We just told you that we know about it. I think there has to be a lot of success. You know, one thing we talk about is deidentified data, creating aggregate data and information that we can act on. But theres always a discussion of what about litigation . And, mitch, im interested, theres just been some changes made in regards to protecting data in litigation. Maybe you can high light for us . Chuck, id just like to provide some backdrop for this. In this room, when were talking primarily in north American Population or maybe if we were talking primarily european population, we talk about just culture. Everybody in the room understands exactly what we mean. Theres a lot of room for interpretation. Whenever you talk about something that is just a culture that is open to an interpretation internationally. So what we focused in on is exactly what you mentioned. A protection of Safety Information. So nishlgly, the work in that area was so calld attachment e that talked about guidance on Safety Information. And at that point, maturity can only be guidance on Safety Information. Coming out of the highlevel Safety Conference of 2010, the countries of the world gave us clear guidance. Guidance was we needed an annex that was devoted to Safety Management processes and we needed to focus in on protection of Safety Information. So just november, last year, the newest annex to the suite of annexes we have to the Chicago Convention came out, annex 19. It also included what we call an attachme attachment, which is guidance on the protection of Safety Information. So what have been the latest changes . Well, weve had a Safety Information Protection Task force. Its met for the past three years. Its been very difficult work. They came forward just a few months ago to the air Navigation Commission of iko with proposal to annex 19 with the state safety program. How koumd we upgrade our guidance to a standard. It covers basically three areas. That one area that i mentioned with the use of Safety Information for safety purposes. With that, lets say of Proper Administration of justice. Other major areas, establishment of standards to ensure that Safety Information is used for intended purposes. These are important proposals and these go across those interpretations of just cultures. This is an initial proposal. It will go out for confrontation. The Pilot International community will have their opportunity to comment on these proposals. Were expecting the proposals to come back to iko in about january of next year. And were hoping that these standards could become applicable in the november time frame, 2016. Very good. Martin, john, do you see any changes as a result of what mitch is developing up there . Do you see any immediate changes in the u. S. Or canada with regards to that . No, e dont because weve been very, very diligent. I can reflect back on the 2000. It was very difficult for pilots to share information. And i think at the root of the problem, at the root of the reticence for them to come to the table was mistrust of the faa, perhaps retrobugs, management labor and the faa of holding at the highest level the tenant of protecting data and information. If we can do that, i assure you all of the data will dry up. And theyll all go away. I think were already there. I really do applaud the ikea work. I think its going to help many of the other states that perhaps dont hold this to the same degree that the United States does. I think the challenge that weve seen in some areas is just trying to deal with an open reporting culture. At the same time, you know, confidential reporting systems. The two protections from, you know, how do you bring those together in the longer term to make it open. We are missing some protection. Theres something we need to provide that protection. We did file once before. And theres a lot of debate that we never got to that protection. Thats really to protect the individuals, thats not to say that the companies themselves need that guide. Weve alluded to the tragedy of malaysia 17. Certainly within the last few weeks, a lot has come out in iko. What is the role in iko in reaction to safety . I was wondering if you would share, you know, or give us a prediction of where you think this is going . Iko has really come in the front here now on this area. This will address what ill call the community is doing in relation to 370 first. We dont know very much about what happened to malaysia 370. The only thing we do know is that we cant exactly locate where it is. Thats the only thing that we know at this point. So the community got together, we organized a multidisciplinary meeting on global flight tracking in march of this year. This braught together the respect of tracking airplanes. So the near term objectives, i have to applaud an Initiative Made by iyotta. In moving ahead in tracking airlines on a global basis. So they formed a an Aircraft Tracking Task force, the att. The att involves the regulators, the Airline Industry itself, it involves the major aim frame manufacturers, air buss, boeing, it involves the air Navigation Service providers worldwide. It also involves the air looirn pilots through your international federation. We expected that their recommendations would come forward from ayiotta to their governing boards at the itch leaptation in september. In parallel to this but directly connected with that, is what we call a con september of operations. As our ability improves, we would want to make sure that the system to respond to an abnormal flight situation can equally and robustly respond to that. The objective is to search and rescue people within a reasonable period of time if they arent our survivors. We have to look at the infrastructure and how that fits into the overall air navigation system. So, again, this is a group that would consist of i would call the leading members of the community in the air navigation inf infrastructu infrastructure. What we call the chairs of our technical panels and having liaison to the Aircraft Tracking Task force. Theyre looking for the concept of operation to be in draft form for consideration by the end of september, as well. So the two groups are being drafted by the air lymes. And were looking for an integrated system isle head. Ultimately, in summary, it will come up to the industry, end of september and the Group Developing the concept of operations for a systemwide approach, their recommendations by the end of september. What about malaysia 17 as far as the role as far as accident investigation. Do you see any changes coming down the pike for that . In the history of what iko has done in actually providing advi advice, going on Factfinding Missions in support of a factfinding investigation, i dont think conceptually thats changed much with malaysia 17. And i think following through with a timetable to spell it out, we may have had a little bit more of a role than weve had in the past given the circumstances. And it certainly spelled out a path for some future work. Within five days, we had a team of people to provide advice to the government. So the rule was to provide advice, provide guidance of the relative aspects of the convention on International Civil aviation. And the provisions as it pertains to accident investigation. It was also there as a Factfinding Mission and that all of the evidence is thoroughly considered. Now, all of this is very much con sis tent with the Security Council resolution which called for a full, thorough, independent International Investigation consistent with International Guy dance. I think you can imagine the circumstances that this occurred that the International Community made it a strong call to participate in this process. We basically provided looking over the shoulder as the recorders were downloaded and the flight data recorder. And well continue our guidance and supporter. But i think what this did, and i listened intently to the previous panel, these comments are very consistent with that previous panel. Just last week, the president of the council of iko and the secretary general of iko conv e convened a ceolevel meeting between iko, iyotta for the air liens and selling Service Providers worldwide. They jointly, when they got together, condemned the use of weapons against civil aircraft. We reminded the state what their obligations are as far as risk and assessment and is previously mitigated to do that. The coordination that state is responsible for between its civil and military sectors. The coordination thats necessary to air traffics and then the operators. But in the world today, there are countries that are at conflict. Those countries cant always carry out, for obvious reasons, the threat assessment, the Risk Mitigation because nayre in the midst of a conflict. So, coming out of this meeting on the 29th of july, it was agreed to form a Highlevel Task force. There will be highlevel representatives from regulatory authorities from states, highlevel officials from industry and also the Pilot Community that has a very strong, vested role and interest in this will also be present during the task force meeting. Task force will have its first meeting next i believe its thursday and friday. The 14th and 15th of august. And ill characterize what they are in a second. Its a little bit unusual in the iko context of things. So that might be a sliegtly different rule. So making sure that the right information gets to the right people at the right time. How do we go forward in that . Vaung very much. Thats interesting. I want to give you an opportunity to ask some questions. So all three of our panels are willing to take your questions. May or may not be on anything weve discussed so far. In light of what mitch just said, how can the u. S. Or canada participate or even direct the International Dialogue thats going on. We have a strong usd and weve seen some changes that may result from this. Yeah, and i think theres certainly a role. And we are a part of that task force. But its actually my colleague on the security side. But i think its inevitable, sbt it . The security and safety are going to be interwoven. So problem hi going to play a role and some of the solutions will be itch leapted through safety improve and design. Its not just the intelligence is how you implement that. I think well both be very engaging. Were very much engaged in the task force. Id like to echo some form of Continuous Monitoring over air kravt during difficult periods of light. While im not here to discuss or establish u. S. Position on that, i do think its fair to say that its very difficult for anyone to say that we shouldnt have Something Different from what weve had. From an aviation standpoint, to have an airplane sitly disappear and not know why is a setback. Theres no doubt about it. We do have a text question. Yes, good morning. One of the questions thats come in, weve had a few. Is it true that airlines in canada, the questions are for mart martin, cannot advertise when looking for new hires in canada . That particular issue is a labor issue, as opposed to aviation safety issue. There is discussion on that. Im not sure i want to give you a blunt answer because im not a hundred percent sure. I dont really want to ask the question because i want to make sure that it would be precise. But thats clear, a labor market issue which bronelongs to a different department. It used to be our Human Resources ministry. Its really an issue in that area. So were engaged. But were not the lead on that decision. Sir . I apologize to set up this question. I kind of have to give a mini speech here. You said that sms and a wellrunning asap program as a compliment to it. Theres a circular, ac 12066 c thats coming out soon. Its been promised to come out next week, next week for the last few years. Its supposed to come out in a couple weeks. Some of the rumors that were hearing about this may be some issues with things like soul source. A pilot reports that theres no other way about it and still allow i allowing discipline or some sort of action. Also, the faa has taken a sense that they want to go to the template for their programs. Meaning that all of their agreements are exactly the same. We at our company are having a great way to start the program. To roll back what youre going to give the new entrant out of des moines makes absolutely no sense to us. The tirs pilot that has taxen a task will end a you will of the information to the faa. And i dont think that is the intent. I think it is a very, very big mistake that the faa is missing. And so i urge you to work with the people at the Head Quarters and say look, guys, if youve got a established program that works at the airlines and mostly here, dont touch them. Let them go. If youre frying to avoid the 30 page mou that someone has, give them a template. If youve got 30 pages, its not working anyway. Like ours is the template plus one or two paragraphs. And thats it. But if you ooir going to take those away, you lose is there anything that you can tell us, as a body, what you said earlier is youre assuring us that these are protected and you want the information. Youre going to lose the information if you go down that path that were being told were going to have to go down. What can you tell us about that . First of all, let me back up to the very beginning of what youre commenting on. When i mentioned sms and how it would sort of drive a very different surveillance model, i certainly am not speaking about specifics of whether were going to be in the cockpit or not. I dont want to be on record saying we were any part of surveillance records. We very much support the need to get Single Source information. If we dont get that, well lose valuable information. I cant emphasize that enough that that is a very important thing. Im not familiar enough that seems to be rumors running around that might undermine that. I dont know that. The only thing i can do is see if it would undermine the very nature of what we just talked about. Ill take that back. Yeah, i think thats a good point. We dont want to do anything, even for the sake of expediency. We dont want to jeopardize, so thank you. Yes, back to the subject of uas. We appreciate your approach to wide scale use at uas,s. But what can we expect and this is sort of a professional speculation. What will the public see as the first use of uass and how far away is that . Its just a speculation. I can tell you we have Real Estate Agents taking aerial photographs. We have farmers looking at their crops. So the uses are almost endless, i would say. Okay. What i would add from the yielgts side is and maybe not i think you used the phrase what would the public see. I will say what the public would be aware of is along the limes of what was sard. I think the public is well aware of widespread use of those. Pipeline. Inspections of pipelines and in the agriculture use. Thats immediate and that may be going on right now. The thing about the kpempgss that allow certain entities in certain isolated air space to operate for a business venture. One of them was the most common one. I think many of you have heard the Motion Picture association and we granted exemption to them. So i think youll see more along those lines. But, again, what youre going to see is you wont see them and this is a great Pilot Community. You wont see them in class b air space any time soon. Mitch, just one last comment for you. Anything you can say internationally . Are there hot spots of the u. S. That youve seen wrapping up as far as development . Just to give you an idea of the size of the industry, right now, for commercial airframes, there are about a half dozen countries that are involved as the final producers of commercial airplanes of today. Ourist mates put it between 40 and 50 states that are presently involved in the design or manufacture of a multipiloted aircraft today. Well, we could talk for hours. Theres a lot of questions. Im very grateful to our panel. I appreciate you coming here and speaking on these subject. [ applause ] join us tuesday here on cspan3. Well, i do believe that government has a place to help make the lives of kentuckians better. We are a superpower in the world. We have two objectives to protect our interest and to protect our homeland. That does not mean that we have to be the worlds police. I think we have work that we have to do right here. Under senator mcconnells 30 years in washington have found themselves in dire circumstances. It begins by making sure that our seniors, my grandmothers, that they have a senator who strengsens and protects medicare and social. So you see do you see that as the role of government in peoples lives . Look, the job of the senator, in my view, is to protect this great country. And the framework is making sure that people have an opportunity to realize their ambitions. It means that too much government can frequently be a deterrent to opportunity. Thats something we have to watch to protect against. When you have an explosion of debt and taxes, what it does is suppress the economy. Make it less likely that our young people will find work and dig their way out of this. Now, in the senate, there is an opportunity to protect jobs almoster day. In paduka, the kwleenup, the new conversion plant thats being built there. All advocated and supported. Over here at the chemical weapons clean up. Stepping in down at Lake Cumberland this year when they decided to that a little fish was endangered by raising the water level, oddly enough. So its a combination of protecting the opportunities that people have to better their lives and to create jobs on virtually a weekly basis. Well, good afternoon, everybody, and thanks for having in here with us. I think that youre going to find this panel exceptionally interesting. Youre going to have some great conversations. And for those of you joining us for the panel, youre also going to be awards with a great presentation from a former astronaut who is now a member of space x. One of the Biggest Challenges that i have sometimes, if i look out and see a group of ten pilots, i ask chemowhat is next gen, typically, even though we are the prak in additioners of the technology, sometimes its difficult to define the term. If you cant define the term, then how do you know what your role is in driving these programs forward. My answer is the efficacy of procedures which drives up the e efficiency and does so with ag aggregate levels of safety and security. How do we get from fixtofixz while the air space system has to be a 24 7 operation. So today weve heard panels discussing several aspects of how we should get the job done safely and securely. Weve listened to the faa, transport canada and provide perspectives on key safety issues and heard leading aviation medical experts provide information on Health Issues affecting the flight deck. Psh push aircraft consume a lot less gas than the platforms we flew two nights ago. Compare what a triple 7 does right now versus a boeing 707. The number of annual Aircraft Operations has also increased exponentially. But the level of safety has never, ever been higher. As pilots, were always looking for new pilot dp centric tools that approve our ability to aifuate, navigate and communicate. Yet, wont overwhelm us or degrade flight safety. We want tools to be used exponenttialy and easily asimilar lated. When you think about it, the att system that were in right now, really, does a lot of things much the wra thway they did it ago. We still do most of our control via Voice Communications and still receive decades to follow. Gradually, we seen Space Systems and cdblc and ads surveillance. Much of the progresz that has been made in oceanic have not really been exported into the nas. And more extensive change has to occur. Change is an inevitable byproduct of a transition to next gen. No equipment procedures and training and on and only. Change means the same old way of doing business will not work looking forward. Change requires strong faa leadership. Change requires moving towards a more nimble corporate model able and willing to make tough decisions in a timely manner and then execute on them. A panel today will look at next gen and the lessons weve learned along the way. Let me give you a little bit of a Reference Point for the reason i chose the word potholes in the title. I kbru up up state up near new york city. And whenever we would drive anywhere, we basically had to have a bucket of coins going through all the toll booths. It was a very teed yus process going from tole booth to toll both. It was a really teed yus thing. Thou, i can get in my car here, washington, d. C. , have a transponder thats on my windshield and go through every single toll plaza without having to stop once and fish out for money. My home state of washington collapsed over the river and basically zeerred a portion of interstate five between seattle and vancouver. Obviously, it didnt take months or years or a decade to do something about it. They had two replacement spans up in place one month later. The question then becomes if we understand the urgency of when things happen on the ground and we understand the importance of our aviation industry, how can we not figure a way or plan to explain that importance and to execute moving these programs forward. So to join me in the discussion, im very pleased to work with marla. Shes kind of essentially playing the role of switserland in this conversation this afternoon. What they do is they look at multimodal transportation issues that grab panels of experts, very knowledgeable folks and they look to provide recommendations. Tomorrows left is bob cool. And he provides a report under the Region Foundation banner. His legacy goes back to many, many administrations. And as well as the faa where hes been a trusted advisor for transportation issues and funding. Youre going to cut across the mason dixon line. Ed, too, is another tremendous expert in the world of aviation transportation. In fact, he was appointed back in 1981 as an advisor on how we could modernize our air space system. And his legacy continues in many, many highlevel boards to include the Management Advisory Council at the faa, work with him on the tarmac and various other things. To eds left is my good friend, nel davis. Nel had 27 years of front line, atc experience. Nel is also the focus point for how we bring equipment policies and procedures and execute on them in the line of business under the air Traffic Organization at the faa. Were tremendously blessed to have all of these folks here and its a great prej ivilege to wo with all of them. Were making sure that we control our solutions. Im going to have a seat and go join everybody in the opening comments. While youre listening to the speakers provide their opening comments, please, listen very carefully. If you have questions, please start writing them down so we can continue this confers moving forward. Marla . Thanks so much, john. Im with the center for transportation which is a transportation policy. One of the most effective things that were able to do as a Research Institution is identify larger transparencies. And as an introconvener, bring together key state holders and Industry Leaders to discuss best possible avenues forward. We ask you what you thought your Biggest Challenges were. Through these conversations, we found that the Biggest Issue was it implementation of next gen. We worked together with everyone educational on this panel and joined together with this working group. Our group discussed the barriers and we found that modernization was inherently liked to air Traffic Control. Its funded through the airports and Airways Trust Fund and the general fund. Subject to annual appropriations along with government procurement. Air Traffic Controls is the only Transportation Service in the federal government that is operated by the federal government. It is also the only service that is operated and regulated by the same entity, which is highly unusual. As a result of this governance structure, some may say too much government intervention. Discussing these challenges, the one group that we should look at informed the system. We began by looking at how this system came to be what it is today. And we also looked into the concept reform that had been made multiple times in the 1980s. We found that intensive reform was stopped by if state holders on what they wanted that reform to look like. Also, extremely important are research thats been looking into what our International Peers have done. We have found that many of our peers over the last 25 years have been able to implement modernization technology such adds next gen at a much faster level than weve been able to. Weve identified three primary structures. The first structure is keeping air Traffic Control operation within the federal government or National Government, as is the case in france. Another, probably the most prevalent model is the government corporation. This model can be found in germany as well as australia. The final model is taking air Traffic Control operation entirely out of National Government and having operated by a nonprofit organization. Currently, our working group is looking a t you to these models and discussing with ourselves the stake holders, what you feel is the best way for us to move forward. And why. The ultimate aim of our group is to hep you make this decision and help you,then, bring this decision to the table. Thank you. Thank reallies very much. Thanks very much. Thanks. Ive been working on aviation policy, air Traffic Control for about 30 years. And have conclusions. But about three years ago, another group, a business round table approached me and other people to create, also a working group thats been working for that threeyear period, to come up with a proposal for an air traffic corporation. And weve had a lot of discussions with all the key stakeholders. Weve concluded there are at least five Important Reasons why we need to do a reform. And marla kind of alluded to them. Number one, that almost everybody agrees on, is the funding situation has become very unstable and unpredictable. This has led to triage going on right now. The knack is basically triageing investments, because there simply isnt enough money, and you cant plan out what moneys going to be there three years from now, five years from now, so people cant plan on equipping and know when they equip, there will actually be a system there that will give them benefits. Another problem thats quite severe for the faa as a federal bureaucracy is what we might Call Technology lag, that the decision cycle time within a the faa is the cycle in avionics. So by the time you implement something, its no longer state of the art. This is a real problem for a system that needs to stay with the state of the art, and be a leading system. Another problem institutionally is that the way things work, when you Pay Attention to the source that provides your funding. And even though the user taxes pay for most of the cost of the system, the money actually comes from congress. Congress appropriates it every year. They always give a lot of directives of how that moneys going to be spent. They limit what you can do, or mandate what you can do, and they have tremendous amount of oversict, because they define it as taxpayers money and they have to account for it. That means the de facto focus of faa is a lot focused on congress, policing congress, because thats where the money comes from. But the focus really should be on pleasing the customers, who are using the system. And the people working the system. And doing what they believe is best. So that, i see, as another governance problem. And finally, the question that marla mentioned, of operations versus regulation, being in the same entity, is recognized in most other parts of the u. S. Government as inherently a conflict. Its recognized by okao about a decade okay that should be organizationally separate, and almost every every leading western country, lets say, has an organizational separation. This is a fact of life now, that these are arms length regulation between the safety regulator and the provider of air traffic services, just as there is between the operators of the airlines, and the mechanics, and the pilot licensing. So its all arms length. As marla said, over 50 countries have created some form of air traffic corporation. And all of those that are real corporations are selffunded. In other words, the funding has been depoliticized. It comes from the customers directly to the corporation that is the provider, whether its a Government Organization or partial publish private as in the uk. That refocuses the focus of the organization on what the customers want, especially if they have a governance model that represents the stakeholders as a governing board, especially as the case in canada, but also true to some extent in the uk. Those are the kinds of things that are going on in other countries. The group at the business round table is working on fleshing out the details of a plan, and of actual proposed draft of legislation that is intended to be ready by early next year when Congress Starts Holding Hearings on the reauthorization. And so were very actively working im also involved with the eno project. I think theyre working very much in parallel with a slightly different focus, but with the same objective, of creating a sustain analysis tem that really works for the aviation customer and stakeholder community. And so look forward to all the discussions that well have. Thanks very much. Over to you, ed. Thanks, sean. I really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. And to have the opportunity to Work Together on a large number of groups around town. And i think our collective efforts have been strong. And i think this is one more example of that. You know, sean mentioned in his opening remarks the importance of next gen. I think while there may be some disagreements on this panel about some of the tactics, i think there is complete unanimity on the goal, getting to next gen. The Aviation Community has been an advocate for next gen. We see it as an essential part of the United States staying the worlds largest, safest, most diverse and most Efficient Air Transportation System in the world. When we started on the next gen path, we had an idea. We had a concept that said if we could go from ground base navigation to Satellite Base navigation, and from Analog Communications to digital communication, that we would open up a lot of opportunities. Opportunities that would allow us to enhance safety, because we could enhance situational awareness. We felt that we could reduce our environmental footprint by having more direct routes. And we felt we could increase the capacity and the throughput, the efficiency of our system by having things like more precise spacing. All of those goals, those concepts i think had widespread support. But as we have moved toward development and implementation, weve begun to recognize, this is no easy task. And i think sean put it out pretty well when he talked about trying to change the tire while moving down the highway. I think one of the things we all agree on is that we want to make sure as we do this evolution, the car does keep moving. Keeps going forward. And it doesnt stop and it doesnt go backwards. As i said before, today the u. S. Has by any empirical measure the best air Transportation System in the world. Its the largest, the safest, the most efficient, the most complex, the most diverse. And our challenge now is to stay the best. How do we need to evolve. Where do we need to go from here. How can we best get there. A lot of people have suggested that the way to go forward is to look outside of the United States, and follow some of the models that have already been discussed. And certainly the business Aviation Community, the entire general Aviation Community are looking at all the alternatives out there and trying to evaluate them. But as we do that, again, we dont want to lose sight of where we are, how we get here, and how we preserve the system opportunities that we have now for everyone going forward. For Business Aviation, access to airports, and access to air space is fundamental to the future of our industry. And for a lot of small towns in Rural Communities all across the United States, that depend on Business Aviation for Economic Development and for jobs, and for humanitarian lift, that access is vitally important. One of the reasons Business Aviation has been so aggressively in support of next gen is because we have seen historically that when air space and airports get congested, Business Aviation tends to get squeezed out. You know, some of you may remember back when midway was largely a general aviation airport. Kind of the same thing with ft. Lauderdale, san jose. Theres a lot of places where where the airport got crowded, and Business Aviation began to be in secondary and tertiary locations. We believe that its important for the future of our industry that we be able to have access to the air space and the airports, and we think this transition from ground base to satellite, from analog to digital, is fundamental to getting there. As i said, not to go backwards. We know there are challenges associated with the current governance structure. We also know, however, that when we look back over the past 15 years, the faas funding stream has been remarkably stable, in a very unstable time. Think back over the last 15 years, the United States was attacked on 9 11. We went to four in 2003. We stood up the entire department of Homeland Security. We faced one of the greatest recessions in our nations economic history. And there have been a few things like hurricanes and oil spills and other challenges that have been out there. Throughout that entire 15year period, funding for the faa has been flat or gone up every year. The general Fund Contribution has been robust. So as we look at alternatives, we want to make sure its a clear evaluation. We understand where were all trying to go. And we understand how we can get there together. But i think sometimes its easy to look and say, junk what we have, lets do something big, lets do something bold, lets do something radical. That may be the appropriate response, but there may be a better alternative. And we want to have that conversation, to make sure that when we have meetings without the five years from now and ten years from now, were always able to begin by saying,