Questions from the Senate Commerce Committee to Randy Babbitt, and his responses (his prepared remarks are on a separate page):
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ): Mr. Babbitt, the FAA has taken a major airspace redesign project in New Jersey, New York, and the Philadelphia region. And it’s going to result in a major overhaul of flight patterns there. Unfortunately, the FAA has not adequately included the frontline air traffic controllers in the FAA’s plan, in my view. Would you pause the, hold the implementation of the airspace redesign project until you see that the interested parties, who have value to contribute, will be included?
Randy Babbitt: Senator, I’m not exactly certain where that process stands at this point in time, and I do understand there is some litigation surrounding it, so I’m not sure just legally what I could agree to do and not do. But I would suggest to you that on a personal basis, I would really like to solicit to solicit the input from all the stakeholders in that area. And I think key to that .. we’re working right now, the Secretary has announced a program to resolve some outstanding issues for the air traffic controllers. To this point in time, they haven’t been active participants in this redesign, and I think it’s key, and I think it’s very important, that they do play a role in this. So I can assure you that I would certainly pursue in trying to get the input from everybody to the extent the law allows me at this point.
[questions to other nominees]
Lautenberg: I would again ask you a question, Mr. Babbitt. In 2006. the former FAA Administrator informed me that Newark Liberty air traffic control tower needed at least 35 full-performance controllers to move the traffic safely. Now there are only 26 certified controllers and there are 7 trainees. This airport is a very busy airport, this airport is a very cumbersome airport in terms of delays, they are enormous. We, I think, have the crown, unfortunately, for being the most delayed airport. If confirmed, can you assure us that the Newark tower will be staffed to the volume of performance that we require there?
Babbitt: Senator, my hope is that every tower in this country is staffed and manned to the highest possible degree. I need to understand more .. we’ve had an issue, as you recall, there were a number of controllers, a substantial number of controllers hired in bulk at a certain period in time. And that has led to a bubble of a lot of controllers being of a similar age or in a band of age, which has resulted in a substantial number of retirements, and that’s not going to go away in the next two or three years. So I will give you my assurance that we are going to look at training facilities and mechanisms, centers of excellence and the like, to get controllers and people in the TRACONs, the en route centers, everyone — at a fully qualified level, and not have to depend on trainees to supplement the staffing.
[questions to other nominees]
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX): Mr. Babbitt — NextGen implementation is, I hope, your highest priority. We have been working on this issue for a long time and I would ask you how you are going to proceed on that, and particularly to assure that all of the people in aviation, both the consumers as well as the airline and aviation community, want to see how this will benefit them, and how do you consider your responsibility to proceed?
Babbitt: First, of course, I know we all accept that safety will be my number one priority. But, in terms of getting next generation, that is one of the highest priorities before us, the FAA and myself personally. What I would like to do, and I have the advantage of currently … there is an industry-wide task force under the umbrella of the RTCA that is looking at — what do the users actually want, what technology do they have on board their aircraft, what technology exists at airports that will allow us to begin to implement a lot of the key functions of the next generation of air navigation and aircraft separation. This is not needed new technology, we have … we don’t need a Manhattan project to move forward. We have a carrier right now, in Louisville, that has a wonderful program going where they guide over a hundred aircraft every night using the NextGen technology with technology we have today. And they make continuous descent approaches, meaning they’re saving four to five hundred pounds of fuel every arrival. The noise footprint that they lay down over the city of Louisville is much smaller than it existed before.
We have this technology. So we need to find out where we can deploy it, and deploy it efficiently, obviously I’m going to be able to turn to some very helpful people here with the team that the President has assembled, and we can do this strategically. And what I mean by strategic implementation — there are place where we will gain the biggest advantage in terms of reducing delays rather than doing things on a linear basis.
[questions to other nominees]
Sen Johnny Isakson (R-GA): Mr. Babbitt, as you know in our discussion in my office, I have some concerns with the slowness of the deployment of next generation as far as FAA is concerned. And I know you worked some with the previous Administrator as far as advising and consulting. What are you going to do to expedite the next generation and the FAA, technology-wise?
Babbitt: Well, I think the most important thing we can do is to work with the stakeholders, come up with a plan that makes sense to them. Currently, Senator, a stakeholder — meaning an airline, whatever this airline is — they’re often being asked to put aboard equipage that in some cases is seven, eight hundred thousand dollars per aircraft. So if you have a fleet of seven hundred airplanes, that’s a very expensive undertaking and they need to understand that they’re going to get a capital return off of that. And I have to say that they have some skepticism. And one of the things that I have tried to set forth here, is .. the FAA, certainly one of my highest priorities, is to make us as accountable and credible as we can be, so that when we ask someone to make that type of a capital commitment, that they’re going to see a benefit, that they are going to enjoy, in fact — if you make a million dollar investment, over a period of years, you’re going to save two million dollars in fuel and five minutes per leg or some calculable amount of money. And in order to do that, in order to deploy that, we need to go to the places where the delays are the worst and sort of work backwards. Now, I’m not suggesting that we take the most delayed region in the nation and start there, I’d suggested we should open up off-Broadway, if you would, where we understand the technology, deploy it, and once we’re convinced it’s up and running, it comes naturally that people will then want to provide the equipage on their aircraft, and we’ll be able to provide the metering, the spacing, and the reduced separation and higher levels of safety that brings the benefit that we hope we will get from NextGen.
Isakson: You were very kind, about two weeks ago, to meet with the families that lost loved ones in the most recent crash, and I had asked you if you were familiar with the Most Wanted Improvements that the NTSB, recommendations they’ve made with regard to air safety. What would be your plans with regard to those recommendations?
Babbitt: Well, I think two levels — obviously, the hearing if you specifically, Senator, talking of flight 3407, we don’t have those recommendations yet. But we do have a number of recommendations, and I know that the NTSB keeps a list of their top 10. I’d like to undertake a review as quickly as possible, if confirmed, to understand those. I had the opportunity last summer, I was on a committee, and a member of that committee that worked for the DOT looking at oversight and risk management, was the former Chairman of the NTSB. And he acknowledged to me that often, the NTSB puts forth a broad array of suggestions because they don’t want any stone, you know, unturned. However, I think we have an obligation to either adopt, modify and adopt, or explain why we didn’t adopt any particular recommendation from the NTSB.
Isakson: Well, I appreciate the answer. I think those families deserve, particularly on the qualification questions, with regards to that aircraft and the pilots’ response on our behalf, so that that something like that does never happen again if at all possible.
[questions to other nominees]
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS): Mr. Babbitt, general aviation is a huge industry for the country and certainly for my state. 150 billion dollar industry in the United States. We’re having a lot of difficulty today, it’s a big export industry, 40% going overseas, but with the global economy having trouble, we’re having trouble with that industry and certainly we are in my state. I’d also point out to you — and perhaps you know this, but many people don’t — that only 10 percent of the airports in the United States are served by commercial air flights. 90 percent are not. And if you’re going to access the places where the 90 percent are, many across my state and others across the country, you need to do that through general aviation. So it’s a key part of linking businesses, linking people, across the country. And I just want to urge you to work with the general aviation industry if you will, and I’m certain you would. I want to invite you as well to come to Wichita to see the hub of the manufacturing of general aviation. We just, we got great people working there building a wonderful product. We’d appreciate if people wouldn’t make fun of those using business aircraft for travel, because it hurts our business and we think it’s a good use, and good resource for time-saving and for linking these 90 percent of the airports in the country that don’t get commercial service. So I want to invite you to Wichita, we’ll feed you a great steak, and we’ll show you nice aircraft.
Babbitt: I’ll take you up on the visit and the steak.
Brownback: Both will be excellent, I can guarantee you.
Babbitt: One thing I would just note — one of the things, one of the by-products of NextGen is ability to have approaches into those 90 percent of airports that aren’t served commercially, because we don’t need to put any ground facilities. These approaches are designed with satellite navigation to guide you in, and provide guidance to hundreds, literally thousands of airports that don’t currently have any navigation facilities. You’ll have precision guidance to runways and airports, if nothing else just to provide better surveillance and approach alignment for people that normally would be flying visually.
Brownback: I think that’s very helpful, and as you work on new air traffic control systems … though there was runway some years ago that I landed that was a grass strip, my guess is you won’t get NextGen into that one. I hope you will work with General Aviation on the air traffic controllers system and on NextGen, and also on the how you pay for it. That’s been a big issue that we’ve wrestled with a lot of times around here, is the cost sharing. You know, general aviation is willing to pay its share, but not be penalized nor .. and want it such that it’s not on a transaction basis, so that every time you call the tower there’s a charge, because I think that really could affect safety if you do it that way. So I hope you’ll work with us as well on how you pay for NextGen and its implementation.
Babbitt: I certainly will, and I had a very good discussion with Senator Rockefeller on that issue. I think that he was, and obviously I’m not in any position to speak on how you all operate on the committee level, but he seemed to think that a resolution was in sight, a compromise that everyone would be reasonably comfortable with.
Brownback: I think so. It’s just, it’s one that we’re concerned about because if it’s funded inappropriately, you’re going to reduce the use of general aviation in the process, or you’re going to hurt safety in the process, either of which I think are harmful to the United States and the United States economy or to air traffic safety.
[questions to other nominees]
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND): I’ve announced that, as chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, we’re going to hold some hearings. We hope that the first one will be June 10th, but we’ll making notice of when the hearings will be on the issue of aviation safety, and I want to ask Mr. Babbitt a few questions if I might. I especially want to refer you back to the stunning disclosures last week. This weekend I read the cockpit recordings that was released by the Transportation Safety Board, and let me go through a couple of the facts that were stunning to me. Someone sitting in a cockpit of a commercial carrier making 16,500 dollars a year in salary and having a second job at a coffee shop. Someone in the crew in the cockpit flying in icy conditions and saying in the cockpit recorder, ‘I’ve had no experience flying in icy conditions.’ Someone in the cockpit saying that she flew all night across the country, all night across the country from Washington State to New York just to get to the duty station to begin flying as a co-pilot on a commuter. A member of the cockpit crew failing 5 exams over a career. As I listen to this, I realize the passengers that got on that airplane got on an airplane that was painted the same way as a trunk carrier, in this case it was Continental, and the question for all of us who fly commuter airlines versus trunk airlines and so on, is are there the same standards in the cockpit? The same standards exist, are the same standards enforced? And if so, what’s the role of the FAA in that? Now, I was just, really staggered by trying to understand last week what was coming out of the National Transportation Safety Board hearings. And I think these facts just make me furious to understand, there’s something wrong here. Is it just this airplane, just this crew? Or is it a system that’s developed and evolved over a lengthy period of time in which we have different standards, dramatically different standards in various cockpits on commercial planes. And Mr. Babbitt, you have a breadth of experience in aviation. Give me your assessment of last week’s disclosures.
Babbitt: All right, sir, I will do my best. In my opening remarks, Senator, I did go back and review a period of time where we introduced one level of safety when I was president of the Air Line Pilots Association. And at that point in time, in 1993/94 there were literally two different sets of regulatory requirements. The aircraft were certified under different rules, less stringent, the pilots were trained under less stringent rules, all of… the flight time limitations were different, and less favorable to the regional pilots, and we didn’t think that was right. And we came before this committee and others, and said, we need … when I buy a ticket on a given airline and I walk out on the ramp and it’s a much smaller airplane, I would at least expect that it would in fact have the same level of safety, it would have the same well-trained crew. We made some changes in that period of time and got those considerably better aligned to develop one level of safety. Perhaps we need to go back and look and see if we’ve gone far enough. The second thing, we have seen a dramatic shift, not that this is an excuse or anything of the like, but I’m simply observing the fact that the regional part of our industry has grown dramatically. We have new technology. We have small jets going into a lot of small cities, the pilots are exposed to a lot more takeoffs and landings at airports that don’t necessarily have the same equipment as a John F. Kennedy or some of the other airports. So all of this adds together to make an environment that exposes them to, you know, a lot higher risk levels, and I think we’re probably going to have to go back and look at some of this.
Dorgan: I understand your point, but I guess my question is: do you think equivalent standards now exist, or does the disclosure last week suggest to you that something different has happened?
Babbitt: The same level, the requirements are there. However…
Dorgan: I understand that, I’m asking about whether the standards exist and are enforced?
Babbitt: The standards are there and they are enforced, but the difference is, the reality is, when you’re hiring a pilot at a major carrier, you’re probably going to get somebody who walks in the door with five thousand hours. When you hire someone at a regional carrier, you’re probably going to get someone with considerably less time.
Dorgan: But Mr. Babbitt, how could they be enforced if you put a co-pilot on a plane flying into Buffalo, New York in the winter with icing who says on the cockpit recorder, ‘I’ve never flown in icing and am very nervous about this.’ That cannot possibly be a standard that is enforced by the FAA.
Babbitt: You’re absolutely correct, Senator, that’s not even a requirement. This idea is that you would have received training in it, I think we need to look at the training. We have today the ability to simulate in high definition and high fidelity simulators anything that happen in an airplane. And why we’re not doing that I think we need to all look at.
Dorgan: And Mr. Babbitt, the question — I’ve raised about five questions, and we’re going to get into them in the hearings of the Subcommittee — of crew rest. I assume that the crew rest issue is not just something with commuters, I’ve sat with pilots on airplanes all over the country who are dead-heading across the country in order to reach their duty station, not unusual at all. In this case, someone goes from the state of Washington to the state of New York to get on an airplane to begin work, flying all night long. Clearly, that is not in anybody’s interest in terms of crew rest standards. I guess what I would ask .. look, I’m going to strongly support your nomination. I told you when we met in my office, I am very pleased you’ve decided to accept this opportunity. But we have not had consistent leadership. We’ve had an acting Administrator now for some while and so on – this is an agency that requires a lot of attention. A lot of good people, but requires a lot of attention. My own view – my own view is that these standards have waned and waxed and I think what’s happened is we have very different standards for commuter carriers than we do for the majors. At least, perhaps not with respect to what the rules require, but certainly with respect to enforcement. I can’t believe anybody would say, yeah, go ahead and put people in an airplane that haven’t flown in icing, or have flown all night to get to the duty station, or are paid $16,000 a year and have to live with their parents in order to make ends meet. That’s not a standard that I think anybody wants in the cockpit of an airplane they board to take a commercial flight. So we’re going to ask tough questions. We’ve been blessed … we’ve not had very many accidents in recent years. We have an unbelievable safety record. But the preponderance of the accidents have been commuters, and I think we’ve gone a ways now without asking the really hard questions – is our attention to detail here and enforcement of standards .. has it waned some, and do we have some real to do to bring these standards back up to par? I think a lot of this is about money, I would say to you, because you can put some very inexpensive pilots in some of those seats and save money. But I’m not sure that’s what the traveling public in this country would expect boarding those airplanes.
Babbitt: Yes, sir.
[questions to other nominees]
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN): Mr. Babbitt, I enjoyed our visit yesterday, and one of the things we talked about was some legislation that Senator Snowe and I actually introduced last year about the FAA inspectors, particularly the supervisory inspectors, and we talked about doing a cooling-off period when inspectors are assigned to a certain company and then they go and they eventually go to that company – there’s a revolving door situation, and there were some major concerns about it in the last few years. At the same time, we understand the importance of having a familiarity with that airline. Could you comment on that?
Babbitt: Yes, Senator, I sure could, and likewise enjoyed the visit yesterday and found that enlightening. The issue was actually one that we covered pretty well in the internal review team. That was one of the subjects that we were to look at, and that is this relationship. And it is a very difficult balance. On the one hand, to understand an airline and understand all of its operations, an inspector has to spend a fair amount of time there. But at what point in time does that time spent working with that carrier, getting to know its people, its management, it’s line employees, when does that become a liability? When do they become too friendly, too accepting — okay, you’ll get it next time – and the answer is, the second that safety of flight becomes an issue. And so we’ve got a position now that is in development, the FAA is in the process of adopting some of the recommendations, and in those recommendations are some ways to deal with that. Remember that you have turnover in the airlines too. So we probably want to look at both sides of that room … if the entire airline management has turned over, there’s no sense to change the inspector. But conversely, if everybody’s in a static environment, it probably makes some sense. There’s a human aspect to it as well, you have someone who’s made a home in Minnesota or someplace – you’ve been here five years …
Klobuchar: Because no one ever wants to leave Minnesota …
Babbitt: That’s right.
Klobuchar: Okay. Thank you.
To read Randy Babbitt’s prepared remarks, click here.
