The Senate Commerce Committee is expected to consider a long-term FAA reauthorization bill tomorrow, breaking a logjam that had been in place since last June over issues including the 1,500-hour rule and slots at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. However, the markup is not without controversy as a dispute continues surrounding an effort to raise the mandatory retirement age from 65 to 67.
FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker weighed in against such a proposal in a letter to the committee, saying: “As Congress considers policies that affect the pool of pilots that may serve Part 121 commercial operations, we strongly encourage preceding that type of change with appropriate research so that the FAA can measure any risk associated with that policy and define appropriate mitigations.” Whitaker further said it is “crucial” that the agency have an opportunity to conduct research first.
Senate Commerce Chair Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) agreed that scientific analysis should come first. “That has not happened. Aviation safety is paramount, and now is not the time to take a shortcut.” The Air Line Pilots Association further has stepped up its opposition on the matter, saying recently released FAA data does not support the need for changing the age limit.
However, potential movement on the reauthorization bill is welcome to aviation interests, and the FAA itself, which is now operating under temporary authority through a stopgap measure passed in December. That measure extended the FAA’s authorization through March 8.
In the House, which passed its version of a long-term bill in July, Transportation and Infrastructure Chair Sam Graves (R-Missouri) said during a hearing yesterday on the state of aviation: “Serious issues within our aviation system have played out time and time again on the nightly news, and in my opinion, the consequences of having no long-term FAA bill are exacerbating them.”