Good morning Chairman Mica, Congressman DeFazio, and Members of the Subcommittee. It is my pleasure to appear before you today on behalf of the Federal Aviation Administration. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the FAA’s 21-year-old Contract Tower Program -- which has provided safe and efficient air traffic control services at airports throughout the continental United States, as well as in Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, and Saipan. 

Before we begin, let me take a moment to talk about how important it is for Congress pass the FAA’s Reauthorization Bill -- Vision 100.  Failure to do so will hold up $60 billion in much needed funding for airport expansion projects, safety improvements, and urgently needed security upgrades.  We also know that airport funding will generate more than 650,000 jobs nationwide over the next four years -- important economic support our country needs right now.

In addition, the FAA will suffer serious consequences if we do not pass a bill by September 30th.  As you know, in our previous reauthorization, AIR-21, Congress modified the tax code to condition appropriations or credits to the Trust Fund.  As a result, FAA programs and activities -- including airport grants -- funded out of the Trust Fund will cease absent an authorization. FAA employees whose salaries are derived from the Trust Fund could also be subject to emergency furloughs.  At a time when the aviation industry is struggling to survive, we cannot afford to create additional instability through programmatic disruptions, furloughs, and by unnecessarily holding up billions of dollars in much needed funding.

We find ourselves in this position because of some unfortunate mischaracterizations -- and misconceptions -- about a provision of the bill that merely maintains the status quo of the FAA’s Contract Tower Program.

Over the last several months, millions of dollars have been spent to misrepresent the FAA’s Contract Tower Program and our intentions about its future. Over and over television and radio ads allege the bill will result in air safety being “sold to the lowest bidder.”  (Pause)   Those ads are wrong and could have the unfortunate effect of undermining public confidence in the safety of the United States aviation system -- which is clearly second to none.

So why is this successful contract towers program under attack now . . . after it was supported by every administrator since its inception in 1982 . . . expanded during the prior administration of President Clinton . . . and received praise from the hill and support from labor groups? 

I can’t speculate, but I will talk about the facts. That’s why I’m here today -- to set the record straight.

First, the Reauthorization Vision 100 bill does not privatize air traffic control. Vision 100 merely preserves the FAA’s option to expand the current Contract Tower Program. In fact -- for the first time -- this bill protects 94% of the air traffic control workforce from outsourcing of any fashion.  Today, air traffic services in this country are provided in three ways: by FAA staffed facilities, contract facilities, and military facilities -- all operated under the watchful eye of the FAA.  Whether the air traffic service is provided by people under contract with FAA or by FAA’s own employees -- we require and ensure that the same high standards for safety are met. This is a far cry from privatization.

Second, let me discuss another area of misconception -- the safety record of contract towers. Again, the facts speak for themselves -- these towers are safe. Furthermore, the Contract Tower Program enhances safety by providing air traffic services to small communities where we would not otherwise be able to provide them. For example, towers at:

Cecil Field in Jacksonville, Florida (Brown-D)

Jackson, TN

Stillwater, OK

Hickory, NC

. . . would not exist today if it weren’t for the FAA’s program.

The safety record of this program was recently documented by the Inspector General’s report. Mr. Mead has discussed his specific findings, but a couple points are worth emphasizing. Contract towers are staffed by highly qualified controllers, who are required to have the same certification and meet all the same safety and security regulations as FAA controllers. Our contract controllers must have prior ATC experience and a valid Control Tower Operator’s certificate. In fact, 99% of contract controllers are former FAA and military controllers.

Finally, contracts for the program are not awarded to the “lowest bidder.”  They go to proven performers who offer the best service and overall value. In selecting the contractors for the contract tower program, technical and quality factors were more important than price in determining “best value.” There’s no question, however, that the program is efficient and saves the taxpayer millions of dollars. This is just one area that helps reduce the overall operating costs of the FAA. 

At a time of increasing budget pressure, this program is essential to controlling our operating costs. On average, contract towers save almost one million dollars per year per tower over FAA staffed towers. The Inspector General concluded in his recent report that “if the 189 fully-funded contract towers had been staffed with FAA controllers in FY 2002, the agency’s annual operating costs could have been $173 million higher.” This is a critical savings for the taxpayer, for the agency, and for our nation. We cannot afford to jeopardize this program in any way.

I am confident that we will all do what’s best for America and pass this important legislation.

This concludes my statement, I will be happy to answer your questions at this time.