U.S. Rep. Sam Graves (R-Missouri) took over the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee as chairman this year as Congress kicked off work on a comprehensive aviation bill to reauthorize the FAA’s programs and address a host of other issues. Congress faces a September 30 deadline to reauthorize the agency. Graves, who has served in Congress since 2001, formerly was the ranking member of the committee and is known in the industry as a general aviation advocate. He has co-chaired the House General Aviation Caucus; spearheaded House legislation on issues involving pilot rights, airport funding, and warbirds; and hosted an annual townhall and airshow—the Wingnuts Flying Circus—at Gould (gold) Peterson Municipal Airport near his hometown of Tarkio, Missouri. He talked with AIN about his desire to provide stability at the FAA, boost safety, and foster general aviation and advanced air mobility through a comprehensive reauthorization bill.
The Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act spans five years. Why is a five-year bill important?
The five-year reauthorization will provide long-term stability and certainty for the FAA and the entire aviation industry. Short-term extensions of the expiring law can’t provide that, and it doesn’t help the agency or the aviation community to have to worry about the harmful effects of a partial FAA shutdown every time a short-term extension ends. I want to be clear that I have no intention of letting the law expire, but only by the House and Senate working together to get a new long-term law in place can we truly look forward to the future of the U.S. aviation system. Our bipartisan bill is called the Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act for a reason. We want to ensure that the American aviation industry has the leadership it needs to continue to maintain and expand upon our nation’s status as the gold standard in aviation safety and innovation. That’s not something that can be achieved by kicking the can down the road with short-term reauthorizations.
The first title jumps into FAA reform. The previous reauthorization bill had called for FAA reforms and the agency in recent years has been reorganizing. Why more reforms? What key issues are you trying to address?
Our bill improves the FAA’s efficiency through reasonable organizational reforms and restructuring. The FAA is simply too slow in everything it does—from rulemakings to aircraft registrations and certifications to just simple paperwork. It’s becoming more and more impossible to get FAA to “yes” on any decision or, frankly, even provide a decision, and this bill makes the agency more agile, in a manner that won’t harm its safety mission. Previous reorganization efforts have focused more on making one area of the agency work better for one part of the industry, but this bill is about making the entire agency more agile and more responsive for everyone who interacts with it.
Also, you include numerous safety-specific provisions. How did the recent near-collisions shape some of these provisions? What were some of your other top safety concerns that this bill addresses?
America’s aviation system is safe, but the system is not immune to stress and must continually be made safer. The bill addresses multiple safety issues, including the recent uptick in runway incursions. In particular, the bill requires the FAA to establish a Runway Safety Council to develop strategies to address safety risks of ground operations at airports. The bill also requires the agency to identify and deploy technologies, equipment, and systems to enhance the safety of ground operations at all medium-hub, large-hub, and other airports that lack surface surveillance capabilities. Among the most important safety features of this bill is the title for a five-year reauthorization of the National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB]—the independent federal agency that investigates all civil aviation accidents, as well as other significant transportation accidents. Having the NTSB functioning and well-equipped is critical to preventing future aviation and transportation safety issues by learning what caused previous accidents.
A key difference with this year’s reauthorization bill is the first title, dedicated to general aviation. Why a separate title? The bill addresses numerous issues surrounding GA. What would you say are among the most urgent?
GA underpins the American aviation sector as we know it. GA airfields across the country have given more Americans than ever the opportunity to fly. From providing the foundational building blocks for most airline pilots to serving as economic engines for small and rural communities, our aviation sector wouldn’t be where it is today without a strong GA community. Most of our aviation professionals, including pilots and mechanics, get their start in GA. But too often, GA issues are ignored or deprioritized by the FAA. This bill recognizes that the success of the U.S. aviation system is built upon a strong GA foundation, which is why I felt it was so important to include the first-ever general aviation title to secure our aviation industry’s long-term success.
There are several provisions in this bill that are essential to the success of the GA sector: increasing Airport Improvement Program [AIP] funding to $4 billion per year, up from the $3.35 billion per year it has remained at for years while construction costs have continually increased. Capitalizing on the successes of BasicMed by expanding the specifications for eligible aircraft and allowing designated pilot examiners to fly under it. Growing and supporting the aviation workforce through the establishment of the National Center for the Advancement of Aerospace, a center where government and aviation industry stakeholders will collaborate on advancing programs to develop a 21st-century aviation workforce. Expanding protections for pilots by prohibiting the FAA from weaponizing the exclusive review of automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) data against a pilot in certain instances. Ensuring that the FAA is processing aircraft registration and renewal applications in a timely manner while also authorizing aircraft owners to continue operating their aircraft during the renewal process so long as certain conditions are met.
The bill includes protections and additional funding for general aviation airports. While recent pandemic-related bills set aside additional funds, have general aviation airports recovered? Are more in danger of closing?
As I mentioned, GA is the biggest pipeline we have for aviation professionals, so ensuring that those airports have the resources they need to continue operating smoothly and fostering growth in the profession is a top priority. It’s important to remember that airport funding provided in recent pandemic-related laws primarily benefited America’s larger airports. Our bill’s proposed increase in AIP funding levels will particularly benefit GA airports. But too often, communities don’t recognize the value that airports provide and look to shut them down or provide few resources.
The Air Line Pilots Association has opposed increasing the mandatory retirement age for commercial airline pilots to 67, while other organizations support it. What was the reasoning behind the change? How would it benefit workforce concerns? Are there associated safety concerns?
This provision was added to the bill due to the approval of an amendment from Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) during the committee’s markup. The reality of the situation is that we have a pilot shortage in the U.S. We focus on addressing workforce challenges in this bill by removing barriers to pursuing aviation careers, expanding the aviation workforce pipeline, improving training standards, and more. However, those solutions to grow the talent pool and rebuild talent pipelines will take time to materialize, and so raising the retirement age is a targeted, near-term solution to alleviate the pilot shortage that is plaguing airline staffing and operations. Rep. Nehls's amendment ensures these pilots remain subjected to the same medical qualifications that they're subjected to today while simultaneously ensuring that airlines can keep highly experienced and skilled pilots in cockpits for an additional two years.
What are your key safety concerns about integration of AAM and how does this bill address that?
AAM is one of the truly exciting innovations and developments happening in aviation today. We are seeing companies and communities begin to invest in and plan for the introduction of aircraft that can provide additional mobility options while addressing issues around community acceptance. However, the FAA has struggled to keep up with the pace of industry even though some of these aircraft have been in design for over a decade. In fact, last year, the FAA changed their approach to certification after having issued two certification bases for powered-lift aircraft.
Since these issues came to light, FAA leadership has stated multiple times that they are committed to putting in place the rules required to allow for commercial operation of powered-lift aircraft by 2025. Our bill holds them to that timeline while ensuring that what is ultimately produced considers the actual operation of these aircraft.
Our bill also contemplates the reality of integration and encourages the FAA to plan ahead. To give an example, while we know powered-lift operations will begin in low volumes that can be handled by air traffic services in most places, any large volumes will require planning and will put additional burdens on an already strained air traffic controller workforce. This is why we want the FAA to study the human-factor impacts of these aircraft and one of the reasons it is important for the FAA to maximize controller training.
Lastly, the bill pushes the FAA to focus on producing guidance for supporting infrastructure and provides airports with flexibility to plan for providing services for these new users.
The Senate-introduced bill covers many of the major themes that this bill addresses. Yet the Senate bill is still very different. How much in agreement are you with the Senate? Are there major issues that you need to work through? And, will you get a bill done by September 30?
There are certainly differences between our bill and the Senate’s, and we’ll work those out once both chambers of Congress have approved their two versions of the legislation. I’m extremely pleased that we marked up our bipartisan bill, which was passed unanimously by the T&I Committee, in line with the ambitious schedule we set at the beginning of this Congress. I look forward to the Senate acting on their bill as soon as possible so that we can then get to work on ironing out any differences. My goal is to have the final product across the finish line and signed by the President by the September 30 deadline, and I will continue to do everything in my power to ensure that happens.
What else about this bill would you like to emphasize for our readers?
I just want to emphasize that this bipartisan bill is critical to America’s global leadership in aviation, to our economy and millions of jobs, and to making the entire system safer and more efficient for all users and the traveling public. I also want to thank Ranking Member Rick Larsen (D-Washington), aviation subcommittee Chairman Garret Graves (R-Louisiana), and Subcommittee Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee) for working with me on this bill—and for all the members of the Transportation Committee engaged in providing input into the development of our bill and working through two days of a committee markup. Between members of the House and the stakeholder community, we had more than 2,000 legislative priorities to consider in assembling this bill. This has truly been a comprehensive and bipartisan effort, and I think that was reflected by the unanimous 63-0 approval our bill received during the markup.