we were able to get the international civil aviation organization to adopt technical instructions which alpa is work toggle straight to ico standards. we also continued to press the department of transportation for a faa regulation regarding the carriage of lithium batteries. another key aspect of one level of safety is the safe integration of unmanned aircraft systems, or as they're now being called, remotely-pilotted aircraft into the national airspace. our key message here is, all aircraft in the airspace where we fly must meet the same safety standards that we currently do, period. it doesn't matter whether a pilot is on a conventional flight deck or sitting in a control station on the ground.

high safety standards must be established and they have to apply to everyone in the airspace. alpa is a member of the aviation rule making committee on uas and on the rtca special committee developing uas standards and we'll continue to participate in those groups to advance this goal. as part of our continued advocacy of a risk-based approach to airline and airport security alpa will continue to press for action to increase funding for the successful federal flight deck officer program. this is a highly cost efficient program which airline pilots are fully trained to protect their flight decks as federal law enforcement officers. the ffdo program serves as a key component of a multilayered approach to aircraft security.

we'll continue to work closely with the tsa in the federal air marshal service, other industry partners and the u.s. congress to resolve issues which have an impact on the program's overall integrity. we will also continue to urge action to advance threatened airspace management so that the air transportation system is positioned to swiftly and effectively respond to potential security threats. to end laser attacks on aircrafts. to improve the security of all cargo operations by doing more, by doing more to secure the flight deck by installing secondary barriers on aircraft and particularly on car fwo aircraft that do not have fortified flight deck doors. by adding full protections for all domestic airports serving all cargo

operations. incorporating from time to time based criminal history checks for all persons with unescorted access to cargo aircraft and the goods they carry. by mandating training for flight crews in the all cargo common strategy and improving the systems and use of technology for the screening of cargo loaded on all cargo aircraft. we will also continue our partnership with apora and tsa to expand the known crew member program to make it available to all u.s. airline pilots and flight attendants. in canada, alpa is also a strong supporter of their restricted access identity card or raic program. we urge its continued implementation. alpa also continues to work

our work-related to modernizing the international airspace system in which we operate. many who are involved in the implementation of next. gen fish intives are getting frustrated with the pace of progress of the as that pace grows it will be important for alpa to remain the honest broker ensuring procedures implemented to increase capacity to do not adversely affect safety or pilot work load. in the area of pilot assistance alpa is working to insure that all commercial airlines have professional standards programs. alpa has participated in a faa rule making committee to address flight crew member professional development and conduct. we expect that the arc will public advisory or and or rule making guidance for programs to address stlees issues. this guidance will serve as

a basis for fostering professional standards programs, for both u.s. and canadian airlines. in addition, alpa recently published a white paper to address the issue of pilot occupational safety and holt and highlighted the need for a dedicated division within both the faa and transport canada to focus on these issues. this white paper will be used as a basis to approach both agencies, to ask for government support of the programs to promote pilot health and safety. now when it comes to aviation safety mission by every measure we're making real progress but these statistics don't come out of nothing. they're the result of a collective effort and constructive partnerships with all stakeholders, legislators, and regulators.

manufacturers, and operators, and other employee groups and labor unions. many of our partners are taking part in the air safety forum later this week and i want to thank you. our panelists, our sponsors, and our exhibitors for helping make the event such as success and for working with alpa to advance our mutual goals. now it's my great pleasure to introduce our keynote speaker, the honorable john pistole, administrator, of the u.s. transportation security administration. in this role administrator pistole, oversees management of a 60,000-strong workforce. the security operations of more than 450 federalized airports throughout the u.s., the federal air marshal service, and the security

for highways, railroads, ports, mass transit systems and pipelines. under his leadership tsa contends to grow as a risk-based intelligence-driven, counterterrorism agency dedicated to protecting our transportation systems. administrator pistole came to the tsa as a 26-year veteran of the fbi with extensive national security and counterterrorism experience. after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he was put in charge of the fbi's greatly expanded counterterrorism programs, eventually becoming the fbi's executive assistant and director for counterterrorism and counterintelligence. in 2004 he was named deputy direct are it for the fbi. he has led or been involved

in several high-profile investigations including the attempted car bombing in times square on may 1st, 2010. the december 25th, 2009, attempted attack on northwest flight 253. the plot against the new york city subways in 2009. the uk liquid explosive plot and the may 2003 suicide bombings of three housing compounds in riyadh, saudi arabia in which 35 people died including thine americans. -- nine americans. he began his career as a special agent with the if. bi in 1983 serving in the minneapolis and new york divisions before his promotion to supervisor in the organized crime section at fbi headquarters in washington, d.c..

in 1999 as an assistant special agent in charge boston he helped lead the investigation and recovery efforts for the egypt air 990 crash off the coast of rhode island. in 2007 pistole received the everett h. levy award for outstanding professionalism and exemplary integrity. he is the recipient of the 2005 presidential rank award for distinguished executive service. since his confirmation in july 2010, administrator pistole has been one of alpa's most important partners. through his leadership the known crew member and trusted traveler programs became a reality. the success of known crew member is a result of alpa's

848 collaboration with the tsa and administrator pistole is integral to that success. last month the tsa took the known crew member program to the next level when 2 announced that flight attendants can now participate in the program. alpa has been a strong proponent for including flight attendants in known crew member and we fully support their participation in the program. administrator pistole embodies many qualities that we at alpa have come to rely on heavily when we advance aviation safety and security goals. and since i became president of alpa we have develop ad constant dialogue. he is honest and accessible. he has a collaborative spirit and he is always open to include alpa and come to us for our expertise and help and he is the precise type of leadership that washington needs especially at this time. on behalf of alpa, we value and appreciate his

commitment to our industry, our profession, and our members. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the honorable john pistole, administrator of the transportation security administration. [applause] >> appreciate it. thank you, captain moak, for that gracious schuss invitation. i know if you decide to run for congress i would vote for you i recall and often. thank you for that. it is a great partnership and a privilege to be here this morning to address you as i did last year. a lot has happened as captain moak mentioned in the last year and i would like to highlight some of the security aspects an challenges that we collectively face in our respective missions, in our effort to provide the most effective security in the most efficient way to help promote the free movement of people and goods worldwide. so the three challenges that would like to focus on are

the threats that we see, the security challenges to passenger airlines, and then the second which is related to the all cargo carriers and then the third is more an internal tsa issue i would just share a little bit with you about in terms of the strengthening of the tsa workforce, professionalizing the workforce, to try to provide the most effective security again in the most professional and efficient way. so the context for the, this year's conference in terms of the threat environment, let's start with, with passengers. so just three months ago, that we saw the second attempt to bring down an airliner from a plot out of yemen by al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. this was the second plot using an improvised explosive device that was completely nonmetallic. it was a new and innovative design and concealment technique similar to the

christmas day attempt of 2009 but with a different type of explosive involved and a different mission and detonation system that had a backup system to overcome what was perceived as failings of the christmas day plot from 2009. and but for the extraordinary intelligence coup that foreign security intelligence services coupled with u.s. government work but for that extraordinary work, that individual who turned out to be a double agent for the security services, would have possibly been successful in his attempt, al qaeda a rare european peninsula desire to insert that person with a suicide bomb into the global supply chain, presumably on a flight coming to the u.s. as his instructions were from the leadership of aqap. and so these threats continue. we see them evolving.

we see them changing. again the fact that they use a new type of expsive is an indication they are going to school on what they believe are detection capabilities and techniques are. and so we have to learn from those and not just be reactive but try to be predictive as to what those threats are and how we can stay at least a half step ahead of those threats. in response to this threat we have recalibrated all our explosive trace detection equipment across the united states and encouraged, not in a regulatory fashion but strongly encouraged our international partners to do the same. we've also had our k-9's out there going through the process of reprinting their detection capability for these new type of explosives, this new type of explosive to insure that a k-9 might pick up on this type of scent. so we see this ongoing challenge of dealing with the evolving threat, again

particularly coming out of yemen but we know there are others situated around the world who have the destruction of a u.s. airliner or flight coming to the u.s. either passenger or cargo, as being their top priority and really being the gold standard for them to prove that they can cause us harm. we only have to look back to the yemen cargo plot from the fall of 2010 and the following propaganda that aqap put out through inspire magazine where the front cover of that particular edition -- edition, $4800, that is all it cost them to devised the two toner cartridge printer bombs shipped from sanaa, yemen, to chicago. yet the billions of dollars to the desare up shun to the global supply chain and movement of cargo particularly and the mail that resulted from that partially base of our regulatory action we took

inserting a ban on cargo coming out of yemen at that time. then the unintended consequences that resulted from that particularly as it related to the movement of mail and parcells around the world. looking back at that passengers, we realized we have had this series of events going back obviously to 9/11 but prior to that, back in 1995 with the plot we're familiar with and multiple airliners coming from southeast asia in that instance but then the continue ages after 9/11 and with richard reid in december of '01 with the shoe bomb and obviously liquids plot captain moak mentioned in august of '06 and then the continue wigs with lab lab of abdulmutallab. 09 and recent plot of april, early may of twenty 12. those are the ones that have succeeded to the plot of actually being a plot against the u.s. we're also

aware of two female suicide bombers in the fall of 2004, on flights out of moscow within 90 minutes of each other, bringing down those two airliners. we believe because of an insider issue that these two women, the black widows they refer to them as, probably chechen related brought down those two airliners, killed 90 souls on those two flights. so that is something we see continually. the challenge for tsa and i believe alpa and everybody interested in the safety and security of passengers and cargo as it relates to the u.s. as what's going on here and the intelligence is such that there is no known specific credible information as relates to the individuals trying to get on an aircraft here today in one of the 450 airports, commercial airports that we have responsibility for providing security, that being said, our concern and is a concern i had while i was at the fbi overseeing the

counterterrorism efforts is not so much those that we know about, those who are on the watch list, those on the no-fly list who should not be flying or some on the list to have known association to terrorism and we believe deserve additional security at the check point if they're trying to fly those are not the ones who cause me great concern. it is we don't know who have been radicalized perhaps on the internet as we've seen a number of individuals in the u.s. have been and those acquired the where with all, knowledge, skills whether with a chemistry background or whatever or reading an anarchist cookbook whatever it is allow to build an improvised explosive device they can conceal as suicide bomber, in carry-on bag or checked bag or perhaps shipping something on cargo. that is what concerns me in how we can work in partnership with you and obviously as part of u.s.

national security efforts where tsa is at one end of the continuum. with other intelligence collectors, nsa, cia particularly collecting that intelligence helping inform our daily actions. as i mentioned last year every day we start, the senior leadership team of tsa starts with a classified intelligence briefing here is what the terrorists are thinking in terms how they might go about causing us harm and that's the challenge that we base. now as it relates to cargo i mentioned the 2010 plot because we see particularly al qaeda in arabian peninsula being interested in bringing down any aircraft coming to u.s. or of course within the u.s. which believe that the layers of security that captain moak mentioned that we have here in the u.s. clearly serve as a deterrent. we know that from classified intercepts and human reporting. so we believe the layers of security we have here are a deterrent. that being said, then how do we work with our

international partners at the over 275 last points of departure coming to the u.s., particularly as it relates to passenger and all cargo, how can we ensure that their standards are such that we can have the highest level of confidence that there's not a terrorist being able to exploit vulnerabilities that may exist overseas. so there's a number of efforts ongoing in that regard. and one of the key takeaways from that yemen cargo plot in october of 2010 was the initiative and innovation of industry, particularly all cargo industry, to step up and do a risk mitigation assessment and then take steps beyond any regulatory actions to insure the best possible security for their worldwide cargo supply chain. so it goes way beyond what we have in terms of any emergency amendments or security directives in terms of regulatory action because recognizing, as you do, that

it's in your best interest to provide the most effective security in the most efficient way. the question is how can we then do that in a partnership worldwide? so there are a number of initiatives ongoing as we address that one of the key aspects in terms of mitigation when we talk about all this is risk mitigation, risk management, which we do every day in our daily lives, our personal lives. in addition to business. we're not talking about trying to eliminate risk which we can try to do. as we did after the yemen cargo plot as i mentioned with the issuance of the emergency amendment, shutting down all cargo coming out of yemen. that is one way to deal with it. there are a lot of costs associated with that. how can we best work together to mitigate or manage risk in an informed fashion? two things that we're doing now as it relates to cargo which are building on those industry initiatives that they have taken particularly here in the u.s. to address those potential

vulnerabilities are the air cargo advanced screening initiative we have with customs and border protection and industry which is simply comes down to the notion of who can we identify as a known shipper and known shipments and how can we get advanced information about those cargo shipments as at the earliest possible opportunity so we can take risk mitigation steps including perhaps the additional screening of individual parcells or pallets at the last point of departure or even sooner? there is industry initiative which is looking at what they described as virtual last points of departure. virtual lpds that involve additional industry involvement to say even though tsa doesn't have regulatory authority over these other airports that fly to the lpds and come to the u.s., how can they work in concert with our standards to say that there is commensurate security

being provided at those virtual lpds. so that is something we're interested exploring with industry to make an assessment of how we can partner and leverage our responsibilities and opportunities to address some of those challenges. so that's the current threat-con tax that we're working within. the threats are real, the stakes are high. how do we continue our collaborative efforts? let me talk a little bet about risk based security as campaign moak mentioned. rbs as we call it within tsa with all do respect to the royal bank of scotland the rbs initiatives include of course the known crew member program which was something that i saw when i came in as administrator two years ago as one of those key opportunities for expanding an existing program in three airports to the point of differentiating between who gets on an aircraft. because we know and trust them and if we don't know and trust pilots to get us safely from point a to point

b, 27, 28,000 times a day in the u.s., then i'm not sure what would all be doing. and so with that simple recognition informed by my experience with over 26 years with the fbi where i travel armed every time i traveled on business and would simply go to the ticket counter, fill out a form, show my credentials, fill out a form. they would sign it. ticket agent would sign it. take it to the exit lane. show my credentials and the form and then a law enforcement officer in many airports, but not all would sign that. i would sign a leo, law enforcement officer book and get on the plane armed. when i came to the tsa woos recognition we're distinguishing and differentiating between both passengers and pilots, flight crew in some respects because we know and trust people for whatever reason. so that's what rbs all about, risk based security, is how can we provide that most

effective security in the most efficient way. so i'm very pleased in, working with great partnership with campaign moak in expansion of the known crew member program. as mentioned we're currently in 18 airports and we'll be in 31 airports by the end of the year, perhaps a little sooner than the end of the year. so that is a significant savings for tsa to say, why should we be spending anytime, other than identity-based screening with pilots and flight attendants, the entire flight crew, why should we spend physically screening them when we trust them with our lives to get from point a to point b? we expand that and look forward to that continued partnership and applaud alpa and a 4a, that initiative working to allow us to focus our time and efforts on those that we know the least about, those that all we know is a name, date of birth and gender that is under secure flight. the second part of our rpbs

that i would like to highlight the tsa precheck program and it is something that, simply recognizing that the more we know about people the more they volunteer information about themselves, either through their elite frequent flyer program with the major u.s. carriers or through the customs border protections global entry program then better judgements we make ahead of time before anybody gets to the actual check point. we do prescreening of those people who very volunteered information about themselves and then we in most instances will allow them to go through an expedited physical screening with a dedicated lane as in indianapolis yesterday, beautiful airport, great facility. obviously the second largest cargo carrier for fedex in the country, announcing the expansion of the tsa precheck to the indianapolis international airport as the 21st airport that we have brought online in conjunction, partnership with the airlines, with the airport authorities and all those who have a vested

interest in that. the plan is, and we are still on schedule to expand tsa precheck to 35 airports by the end of the year and if you have not seen it, demonstrated or been through it yourself in some other capacity, in most airports there is a dedicated lane and we allow passengers to keep their shoes on, belt on, light jacket on, keep liquid aerosol jells in the 311 bag and carry-on alongwith their laptop. in most instances they would go through a walk-through metal detector. so it freightly improves the efficiency at the check point for us because we get more people through in a, expedited fashion because we've done that prescreening and then the opportunity is for us to spend more time again clearly with those who are on the terrorist watch list and selectees, and again detection officer may identify as needing additional scrutiny. so the precheck program is something that we are embracing wholeheartedly.

it adds initiative and innovation for us to say let's get away from that one size fits all construct using risk based, intelligence-driven approach and focus on those higher risk because we know the least about those other travelers. now since we started tsa precheck last fall we have had over two million passengers go through and there is strong bipartisan support on the hill for the precheck program and rbs overall. the only complaints i heard why not more airports sooner? and obviously we're trying to be very deliberate. anytime you deal with security matters we want to make sure we get it right and that the process and protocols are in place. there have been some questions about whether this is an international program and obviously for the canadian representatives here and others, right now it is just a u.s. domestic program but we are in discussions with others. in fact i had a meeting last week with my counterparts from the european union,

canada and australia, to discuss a number of different issues, anticipation of the international civil aviation organization high level meeting next month in montreal. there's a number of issues coming out from that meeting but one of the things we talked about is the possible expansion of our rbs principles and policies internationally and would there be reciprocity. so for you as pilots does that mean you can go through precheck and fly to the e.u., canada, australia and they would accept you? presumably that would be the case. and then means would we accept, if they enstatute similar programs would we accept them coming here based on the prescreening that they have done or whatever program they set up. so there's a lot of interest and continuing dialogue about that. so we'll look more at that in 2013 to see what the possibilities may be. other aspects of risk based security, rbs, of course involve those other groups of people, children 12 and younger, recognizing they're

not terrorists but could be used by terrorists. so we afford them a different type of screening. and again everybody still goes through some type of screening whether prescreening i mentioned earlier or the physical screening that is involved. 12 and under, 75 and older, again recognizing that there may be some terrorists, there are some people o the terrorist watch list who are over 75 but we can always afford them additional screening if we believe there's current intelligence. most of these people are fund-raisers from decades ago and i believe pose little if any threat to civil aviation. members of the military, we've, initiated that program. both at dca and setac in terms of two pilot airports and two initial airports where we provide expedited, tsa precheck screening for members of the military using the common access

card. we're trying to move away from that card designation where we need a separate card reader to do a list base serve approach similar to what we do at precheck embedding information in the bar code for those known trusted travelers. honor flights as world war ii veterans coming back here to d.c. to view the world war ii memorial, obviously we believe them to be known and trusted and so we provide a different type of security for them. and then there's other trusted groups. those who we know a lot about, either because of their employment, their work background, and many kpa peltz there include the u.s. intelligence community, those with top secret security clearances, those that we trust with our nation's secrets and recognizing that there is no guaranty in any of this that we can always find an exception in any of these groups to say yes, but that is a bad person. we'll always keep random and unpredictable as part of the screening.

it is not a right. it is a privilege to go through the tsa precheck process which we can revoke at any time. in fact we've had several people go through where they forgot that they were carrying a fire arm and so those people are no longer part of the precheck program because of something that we have to have some focus on, in terms of how we move forward, identifying those who, we can know and trust. so let me move on in terms of with rbs as we look to ex-chand -- expand that. we are currently in discussions with private industry and with our own folks to say, how can we with expand the tsa precheck population? so the idea is even though we've had two million people go through and we anticipate an additional million people perhaps each month for the rest of the year, maybe add to that population who are going through as we expand the number of airports we're interested in trying to

identify those people who perhaps aren't the elite frequent flyers or don't have a passport so they wouldn't qualify for the global entry program but who may be willing to pay a fee, not necessarily to us but to a private provider, to have some type of background and assessment done and then to provide that information to us, the airlines provide that information to us through some mechanism that would allow us to identify them as known or trusted travelers. so that is something we're working on. again that's, we'll see what happens through the rest of this year but we mentioned that, i mentioned that as a way of trying it expand the trusted population as we continue on. so moving onto the third point i mentioned, strengthening the tsa workforce, this is something that we are, are working on in several respects. one is, we have created a tsa academy, coming from the

fbi and those coming from through, from the military academies, recognize the benefit of having an academy where new highs can train, develop he is spring decorps and have a sense of ownership context. we don't have the money from congress to build the tsa academy and using space at the federal law enforcement training center in georgia where space is available. there is a small sign that says tsa academy. where we're starting training and we started with our supervisors who on the front lines there, with the transportation security officers, i believe supervisors are critical in anytime of going through significant change that they be empowered and ensure that they have all the tools they need to help drive the change that we're going through at tsa. starting with the first several classes of

supervisors. we'll complete training for all the supervisors in the next year-and-a-half and the key is to how they can then have the leadership skills. some have had leadership training but some have not but then all those things that are important for a supervisor to be able to give feedback to the workforce and to focus on that change, both in terms of risk based security which is a paradigm shift for us and also as we embark on a new collective bargaining agreement, historic agreement that we have with afge, which negotiations concluded on that last week. as we move forward in a new partnership with the unions to see here is how we need to go about business with these two major drivers of change to help professionalize the workforce. again the key is how can we provide the most effective security in the most efficient way and i believe the professional sigs of the workforce is the one of the key enablers. we're provide training for

every single security officer, what we call tactical communications, taccom. it is simple techniques for how to deescalate a confrontational situation. so a number of these officers that have not had these type of training. if you engage a passenger who is upset for whatever reason, how do you deescalate that and still get the job done in terms of the security mission but do it in a professional way that helps diffuse whatever tensions there and try to work through that in a professional way. we have trained over 35,000 of our officers in that taccom training and we'll continue that here over the next several months. let me move on. a number of different initiatives we have in terms of the professionization of the workforce. my expectations for every tsa employee are hard work, professionalism and integrity. when we fall short of that, which we do some times,

there are incidents in the news about security officers stealing from checkpoints or from passengers or just doing things that are not professional, then we take steps to address that. last year, we created an office of professional responsibility that happened dells the ajudication of misconduct cases like that. in a uniform, consistent manner, so if somebody at lax does something that somebody at jfk does something similar the adjudication of those investigations will be substantially similar. we have a table of penalties with three categories. the one if there is mitigating circumstances, one if there is no mitigating or, aggravating circumstances. so gives predictability to the workforce to say, if you do this, and you are adjudged guilty, you have done that, then you have a pretty good scenes here is what the adjudication of that will be. so it instills some more confidence in the workforce in terms of moving forward.

that's something as i was doing town halls two years ago when i first came in i found a lot of concern, heard a lot of concerns about seeming arbitrariness and lack of consistency in terms of that adjudication. so the last point i'd like to make is just on the way forward. where do i see things going in terms of our partnership, in terms of risk based security and just a couple of points on that. first, we want to expand the rbs principles and policies and populations in a reasonable, sensible, way that addresses the different populations in a way that i described earlier. and welcome alpa's input to that, those that we want to continue expanding that population. we are looking at different possibilities in terms of what a quote, check point of the future might look like.

iota has strongly been promoting the check point of the future which we have a lot of interest in. think it is good idea. intriguing from the standpoint how that will actually be accomplished. right now the technology for an integrated solution to walk through one check point if you will, that would detect all types of threats is not there, but we're interested in, and i have talked with industry about that in terms of their initiatives and innovations that can get beyond just the spiral development of normal technology development to get through a to a break through technology to detection of multiple types of threats. that he is what we're interested in. meanwhile the technologists on those solutions, rbs, risk based security initiative is incorporating many principles of the check point of future differentiating between people before they get to the check point and having

different levels of security screening afforded based on what we know so very similar principles there. so we, we endorse that. the last point is, that the partnership with alpa has been and will continue i believe to be a key enabler what we're doing in tsa to provide that most effective security in the most efficient way. so i want that thank you. i want to thank captain moak for his leadership and for that partnership as we work together to insure the best possible movement of people and goods with the best security possible. with that, thank you for your time, and attention this morning. thank you. [applause] >> we have time for just a couple of questions this morning. and if you would go to the mic, we'll start right here.

sir? >> [inaudible]. -- tsa's approach to agency's risk based approach. this is a major --. i was curious what challenges -- [inaudible] >> yeah. thank you. so it is a paradigm shift. we're really redefining who tsa is and how we go about executing on our mission. so there's both internal challenges to convince the workforce this makes sense because everybody was trained that anybody can be a terrorist and so we have to treat each person accordingly. so there's been a basically an educational process with the workforce. and particularly with the leadership, the federal security directors who obviously need to embrace this and who have to drive that change and so that's why i do a number of town hall meetings and talk to folks that do a blog.

we do all types of things to try to communicate what's the reason behind rbs, the risk based security initiative. then there is the external stakeholders. again, alpa has been a great supporter promoting that with known crewmember both for pilots and flight attendants. so appreciate that. obviously the interest on the hill is keen. the industry, there is a, coming back from indianapolis yesterday and saw the united magazine in the pocket there of the seat and there's an article by the ceo of, his column are. called tsa precheck where it's a strong endorsement what we're trying to do. so it's that type of engagement and partnership. because this is all done in partnership. without the airlines, without the airports authorities, without the pilots' association, the flight attendant's association we wouldn't be able to do this. so all that partnership. >> great. we have time for two more. we'll go back over here.

then we'll come back that way. sir? >> yes, sir. i just wanted to ask you real quick you said as a result of your fbi experience that you were not necessarily concerned with the 7 to 8,000 people under investigation for terrorist-related activities. and that law enforcement and the intelligence community know about these individuals before they reach the airport. my question is, is it the tsa's responsibility or is it another organization's responsibility to identify the terrorists or terrorist sympathizers who been radicalized or who may be sleepers but have not been identify by leos or the intelligence community? could you comment on the government's success in identifying these individuals? >> sure. it is a shared responsibility. first it is concerned citizens who may know about something, whether you see something, say something umbrella or the local police who may do a traffic stop or respond to a domestic situation where they come across information or indicia of something that is

of concern but the primary responsibility from the federal government is the fbi's joint terrorism task forces. over 100 task forces around the country which are comprised state and local police an all types of others including tsa, federal air marshals in most instances. so it is that shared responsibility for them to identify those punitive terrorists on the first-hand, in the first instance. if we have to rely, just in the a void not having anything identified prior to somebody getting a check point it makes our job much, much more difficult. as we know, terrorists only have to succeed once and we have to get the right every time. risk based is risk management, risk mittgation, not risk elimination. we rely on all the other agencies including overseas collection. the two best exams else are -- pam else are the

underwear plot interest three months ago and yemen cargo plot. it led to identification of two cargo packs and this individual a great undercover double agent. allows us to the best jobl job here. sir? >> i'm phil marshall. i've done a seven-year investigation into the 9/11 attack. you keep mentioning the bojika plot and the underwear bomb and all these. i'm curious, in that report the 2002 congressional joint inquiry report that senator bob graham headed, he recently filed a suit against the saudi arabian government and they had 80 pages worth of evidence on the saudi team that was in the united states who were out in the arizona desert training for the 9/11 mission. i'm just curious why you did

not mention that? >> well, there is a lot of things i could have mentioned this morning that went way beyond my limited remarks. 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi. the saudi government took steps particularly after the 2003, the may 12th, 2003 bombing in riyadh that campaign moak mentioned i worked on to take steps to address both al qaeda operating out of the arabian peninsula but the fund-raising that took place in the kingdom and took a number of steps to address that. so there's a lot of other things i could have talked about but the focus was on how do we move forward given the context of those prior plots and what have we learned from them and how we can best work in partnership to best that posture. >> that is all for the questions of administrator pistole. thanks so much for talking with us and taking time to take questions. >> good to see you, captain

moak [applause] >> now i will turn it over to captain hogeman. >> okay. thank you, administrator pistole, for your comments. it is now time for our first break. a rather short break. we would like to restart at 10:00 a.m. so please visit our exhibitors and response oars -- sponsors out in the area and please be back at 10:00. i would like to give a special thanks to the airline association federal credit union. see you in a few minutes. ♪ >> the airline pilots' association is holding a day-long forum today on air safety as part of their air safety conference this week here in washington. coming up a discussion how to achieve a level of

aviation safety. panelists will include representatives of pilots, airlines and federal aviation administration. a little bit later today, airport port security and health issues affecting pilots. the airline pilots' association is the largest pilots union and represents airline pilots in the u.s. and canada. looking at more of our live coverage today on the c-span networks on c-span3 at 11:00 a.m. eastern former federal prosecutor andrew mccarthy outlines alleged ties between an aide to secretary of state hillary clinton and the muslim brotherhood. that is live on c-span3 start this morning at 11 eastern. at 1230, c-span will be live as white house counterterrorism advisor john brennan speaks at the council on foreign relations. he is expected to talk about u.s. policy towards yemen. at 1:00 eastern, nasa releases more photos of mars and on the third day of the curiosity rover's trip to mars. we'll bring you the mission

briefing on c-span3. >> well the library of congress has a new exhibit. it is called books that shaped america. 88 books were selected by the library for their influence on america and american culture. here is a brief interview about the exhibit and how you can join in on an online chat about the library's list and what books you think thud be -- should be included. >> we called it books that shaped america as opposed to words we considered like changed america. we think books slowly have an impact on american society. so many books have had such a profound influence on american culture and society and indeed the very essence of what america is. the earliest book is actually ben franklin's book on electricity. of course thomas payne's book, that really kind of sparked or saved the american revolution. novels are a critical part of american culture.

many of them identified who we were becoming or the aspirations we had as a nation. others told about experiences that we had uniquely as americans. we also thought that it was very important to look at nonfiction and books that either were self-help or kind of broke barriers of certain kinds. we looked for many books that were innovative. that kind of showed america as an innovative country that used books and stories to enspire going to the frontier. and that could be literally or intellectual. >> if you would like to participate in an online discussion with roberta shaffer, associate librarian of the library of congress one we will then air on "book tv" we would like to hear from you. e-mail us, booktv@c-span.org.

about a ten-minute break in the airline pilots' association conference. we'll return for live coverage shortly. right now the environmental working group and defenders of wildlife released a report this week on high crop prices and farm subsidies. the report ties agriculture to the loss of wetlands, threatening wildlife and water quality. the group's government affairs vice president scott faber, speaks at the news conference. >> ready to go? good morning, everyone. my name is ken cook. i'm president of environmental working group and i want to thank all of you for attending this press conference today. when environmental working group and defenders of wildlife will be releasing a new study called, plowed under. in the early 1970s as a graduate student studying soil science at the university of missouri i saw unfolding around me the world food crisis. a run-up in crop prices that

had never been seen before, and in washington the secretary of agriculture at that time, early butts, told the farmers that the government would be getting out of agriculture. he exhorted farmers to plant fence row to fence row. because we no longer needed strict supply controls we had in place for a generation. we no longer had to worry about low agricultural prices. most of all we didn't have to worry about the agricultural landscape. for those of us who were in the field then the results were really shocking. not only did farmers plant fence row to fence row, they tore up pretty much everything in between. planting from stream bank it stream bank. they tore up bottom land hard woods that we have never yet recovered to plant soybeans. they plowed vast new areas of the great plains that hadn't been plowed in many

years. and we saw soybeans and corn sprouting up everywhere. rather like it's beginning to look now as this report documents, it was significant enough and noteworthy enough that in 1979 the pulitzer prize was awarded to james risser of "the des moines register", for his series, environmental crisis down on the farm. when i first came to washington in the mid 1970s there were tractors on the mall. farmers were protesting because the effort to get the government out of agriculture, to exhort farmers to plant fence row to fence row, had backfired tragically. prices were plummeting. farm incomes were down, and many farmers were losing land that had been in their families for generations. we spent most of the next 30 years trying to recover.

in a series of landmark conservation laws and programs we managed to hold back much of the damage that had been done and actually began to heal some of the damage. wetlands were recovering, being restored. grassland for most of the last decade or two has been actually increasing slightly. we've been holding our own. and for a generation of sportsmen and wildlife enthusiasts who have enjoyed what has been called the conservation renaissance of the past 25 years, these last few years have been a rude awakening. today we put a number on the problem, the issue that simply is a number that represents what we've been hearing in report from the field, all over the midwest, all over farm country, of

land being heavily used. land being plowed up that hadn't been plowed up for a generation. of farmers planting basically in county ditch rows, planting right up against river probation and the damage is severe. today the report we're releasing comes about through the analysis of some 3040 gigabytes of data developed by the department of agriculture that basically translates satellite imagery into categories of land use and after analyzing that data, our landscape analyst at our aims, iowa, office, was able to conclude that something in the neighborhood of 23 to 24 million acres of grassland and wetlands, wildlife habitat, has been

converted to crop production in just the last four crop years. an extraordinary turn b that could have lasting implications and we're not sure that we've really in terms of the environment hit the bottom yet. so today is a wake-up call for everyone who cares about the land. we can't forget. we shouldn't forget not only did the government not get out of agriculture, but that in no small measure what we're seeing today is a consequence of the government getting ever deeper into agriculture. our crop insurance program most recently. a commodity series of programs and ethanol subsidies and other government instruments have been pushing farmers to grow more and more on the land base of the united states. and that has expanded the corn belt, expanded the grain belt into areas we had protected for a generation but now are under the plow

and even more acres are at risk. do we're going to hear from several experts. first we'll be hearing from scott faber, who is the vice president of government affairs at environmental working group and a coauthor of this report. we'll also hear from jake lee, who is a policy analyst with defenders of wildlife. defenders has been a partner with ewg on many efforts we've undertaken this year during the farm bill debate. he is representing tim mail who unable to be here and a coauthor of the report. we may be hearing from soren lundquist, who is the landscape analyst who prepared the study. did the computer graphic, mapping analysis that this report is based on. so with that i'll turn it over to scott faber, ewg's vice president of government affairs. >> thank you, ken. good morning. why don't we go ahead and start the powerpoint presentation.

first i'll do is quickly summarize the key findings of the analysis that was completed by soren in our iowa office. we found that in the last four crop years from 2008 to 2011, that more than 23 million acres of wetlands, grasslands and shrublands were converted to grow crops. that a very high commodity prices in combination with unlimited insurance subsidies have contributed to the conversion of these wetlands, grasslands and shrublands to crops and these conversions are putting extraordinary new pressure on wildlife species, especially rare species and compounding the problems we face with water quality around the country. this chart, as this chart shows, again, more than 23

million acres were converted between 2008 and 2011. of that amount, 8.4 million acres were converted to grow corn, 5.6 million acres were converted to grow soybeans, 5.2 million acres were converted to grow winter wheat, and other acres of lesser amounts were converted to grow other crops, again for a grand total of nearly 23.7 million acres. next slide, please. this map helps really demonstrate the extent of the loss, as you can see, the dark blue acres, very dark blue shows those counties where more than 50,000 acres of grasslands, wetlands and shrub lands were converted to grow crops. overall 11 states had losses of more than a million acres. at least more than a million acres.

147 counties lost at least 30,000 acres each. . . more about how we did the analysis, but essentially wg relied upon the cropland a day earlier annually updated by the usda. the ceo satellite data that is used to track and classified ground cover. we use the program graf 6.4 to

track annual conversions of the habitats to the cropland and from cropland from grassland wetlands and shot lands. quick through ose until we get to the chart that shows the crop insurance to spending. you see sorghum. let's stop here. and as you can see if we toggle between this slide and the next slide back and forth, there's a very strong correlation between the loss of wetlands, grasslands and schwab plans, and the concentration of crop insurance premium subsidies. let me repeat that because i think it's really the thing that struck us was there is a very strong correlation between those parts of the country, where you are seeing the greatest losses in these habitats, and those parts of the country where the government is providing the greatest amount of crop insurance premium subsidies to

landowners. and maybe go to the next chart after this for this one. that in part reflects the fact that the cost of crop insurance premium subsidies has risen dramatically in the last decade -- >> you can see this event in its entirety go to our website, c-span.org. we are leaving now to go to the airline pilots association safety forum. attendees are returning from a brick to a discussion on how to achieve a level of aviation safety. panelists include a representative of pilots, airline and federal aviation administration. >> please, come in and take your seat and turn off all electronic devices. thank you.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> okay. well, welcome back. our first panel this week is with rulemakings and aviation safety. since i moderating it, i'm going to step aside as being your host and be your moderator for this next panel. everyone in this room knows that to be safe and successful as professional aviators, we have to learn and follow a set of rules and procedures. the incredible safety records we now enjoy in our industry is due in no small measure to the body of standards for training, operations, airplane manufacturer, airport and the list goes on. of course those rules are not static or constant. they change as our industry changes and evolves. we learn from experience. sometimes experience can be costly, painful or tragic, and we must ensure that the disasters lessons of the past are not repeated. so, over time our experience

leads to more rules. here's a statistic. in 1945, the u.s. civil aviation regulations contained a mere 25 pages of rules that covered training pilots and operating aircraft. 70 years later, we recognized many of those early concept are now included in well over 400 pages in today's u.s. far part 6191 at 921 as well as other regulations. you'll also notice that we felt a lot of safety holes in those years. i'm confident that the evolution of the rules in canada and the rest of the international community have been about the same. most time changes are slowly and deliberately and with good reason. in aviation, just as in all aspects of modern life, making rules is hard. it's supposed to be hard. we need to be sure that we know exactly what we are changing, why come and identify other consequences before we just

arbitrarily change something. it's supposed to be responsive when we find a hole in the safety net we need to be able to patch it in a hurry. so, how do we strike the right balance between keeping the safety bar high while keeping the regulatory revision process nimble at the same time? making effective rules requires collaboration. as an industry, we have learned that if we and all stakeholders in the process of developing the rules, we get a better product. collaboration lets us find out early in the process what trade-offs can be made to balance all the competing interests and still get the desired outcome. even with everybody at the table the, the process can get very complicated very fast. now let's talk about cost. in 1997 the white house commission on aviation safety and security, better known as the commission, concluded that while a cost-benefit analysis is a great tool to help in rulemakings efforts, safety and

accosts should not be used as the only criteria. safety enhancement gains can be difficult to measure. so being expensive should not automatically disqualify proposals from consideration. our operating rules guilaume wait words achieving a single high level of safety throughout the world. however, we as pilots know there are places that we fly to that don't necessarily conform to the same standards we are used to. as a result many of us in this room have devoted a tremendous amount of energy over many years to the task of international harmonization of our safety standards. a lot of progress has been made in that area. one thing is for sure, the regulatory environment and the international standards for and the safety agenda for those of us doing the safety work. today, with us today is a very distinguished group of speakers from the international aviation community, who are going to give us their views on how to establish a single high level of

safety for which we all strive. like all the other panelists this week, we will give each a brief introduction. you can find more comprehensive biographies of all of our speakers in your program booklet. leading off the day, we have ms. ms. peggy indolent and administrator for the faa. then mr. martin elie director general of civil aviation for transport canada. then they will share with us their top priorities in the united states and canada. we will hear the airline perspective on north american free of a free landscape from mr. tom hendricks. tom serves as a senior vice president of safety and operations at the airlines for america. they will give a global perspective on the air safety standards for mr. mitchell fox, the chief of flight operations for icao and our own first alpa vice president captain sean cassidy will offer his thoughts on the role of the end user,

namely the pilots in the cockpit in the regulatory process. so, let's begin. i would like to start with you, peggy and like to hear from you on the safety priorities you are pursuing at the faa in today's regulatory environment. >> thank you, chuck and alpa for asking me to be part of the panel. i'm looking forward to the discussion we will be able to get into because when we see the interaction and understand better what questions you have, we can make the panel perhaps more interesting. but i think it's important to note how the theme of this panel links to the overall theme of the conference. so this panel is talking about one level of safety, and because we are trying to accomplish that, i think it's become clear to all of us that everything matters. i think it's a fabulous thing for this year's conference, because we've gotten to the point where every small thing is something we need to know and understand is that we can better manage their risks within the industry.

so let me talk a little bit about some priorities. i think -- and i hope all of you know -- the number one priority for the faa is to work together with all of our industry partners. and when i say industry, i really do mean everybody involved. i was actually at one of these conferences and used that term quite a bit, and after the panel someone came to me and said you never mentioned labor. well, for safety, from where i sit, labour is a part of the industry. there may be reasons why labor-management have to take different perspectives on some issues but that's not the case on safety issues. so you are a key player in our interactions with the aviation industry as we set our safety priorities and working together with our key priorities is to focus on the voluntary programs because we've already seen how much benefit those can give us. i know many of you are familiar with the commercial aviation safety team. several of us on that panel serve on the team and alpa has been a key player in the success

of the commercial aviation safety team from its inception. you can very well represented and now it's also created the aviation safety information and sharing system, alpa has been a key player in that initiative as well. and it is because we understand the perspective that sleeper brings to those discussions the voluntary programs have gotten stronger over time. so those will continue to be one of our key initiatives to the safety sharing program, the information sharing program. we've brought together data from almost all of the airlines, cover and probably over 90% of the operations in the u.s.. both through the individual reporting programs as well as through fogle programs. but we've merged that with a lot of data that faa has through the air traffic system and a lot of aviation data systems that are available that gives us a much fuller picture of the kind of risks that remain in the systems that we can identify safety enhancement that can address those. those programs, along with a

kewpie another voluntary program will continue to be key focus areas for the faa as we work with the industry to continue to strive one level of safety. and again these are three programs that show how everything matters so on the aqap premier analyzing the effectiveness of training, able to better understand where to make improvements to the training program so as to continue to strive towards a single level of safety. today, 75% of the 121 carriers are using or have begun to introduce aqp programs and we think that is an important step forward to raising the level of training that we see throughout the system. and again, we really appreciate alpa's strong support of programs like aqp that continue to enhance both the pilots training and keep devotees, but more importantly to help us improve safety. our regulatory priorities are a

little more complicated. i think as many of you know, through congressional actions both in the summer of 2010, and more recently in the faa reauthorization bill, we've gotten a tremendous number of directions on regulatory initiatives coming and we have a number of those under way. under the original safety bill, of course we've already completed the work on the flight duty and rest rule and we are continuing to push forward on a number of the other initiatives that were called out in that particular legislation. i think we are struggling, and i think actually chuck touched on it in his opening remarks so i will talk about a cost-benefit and the analysis we go through but let me highlight a couple of the key priorities to we are working hard on. the first one for us is the requirement to put in place the safety management systems and all part 21 carriers. i think all of us are familiar with and understand your feet to sort of intellectually how moving towards a safety management system is going to

help move our safety are that much higher. but i have to tell you it is pretty complicated to figure out exactly how to implement one of those kinds of programs, and more importantly, how to describe in rules of the elements of that program need to be and how to go about doing it. the dilemma that we run into oftentimes as we going to rule making is as we try to describe or to articulate exactly what the regulation requires, it sets parameters. so it sets up what is required and for some that means the letter isn't set isn't required or insecticide to do something more media i will then that contrary to what the rule wanted. so what we are trying to do through our pilot programs, and i know many of you are employed by companies that are part of our pilot programs, we are really trying to see in action what is it that a safety management system needs to encompass? so, when we set the language and our rules, we haven't had a consequence of leaving something

out or being overly broad were being too narrow. so, we are learning a lot from the pilot programs and we are a little bit behind on the schedule that congress set for us in that final rule. but i can assure you that the estimates for will was one of our top priority is not just because the congress directed it but because we know you know they're the future for aviation safety. let me touch a little bit on the cost benefit issue. it is true that we are required by both statute and by presidential the executive order to consider thecosts and the benefits to society of any standard that we set. is not unique to faa or aviation. it's a requirement for all rulemakings organizations. and we are not required to show that the costs are less than the benefits. we are required to show that the costs are justified in relation to the benefits that the public will receive. the dilemma that we face in aviation is because we've made it so safe, we are not very

often now faced with assaulting a past failure where sometimes it's very easy to show that failure costs society a huge number of dollars. what we are trying to do, and with sms and all the voluntary programs will help us but what we are trying to do is identify the risk before it man manifests itself as failure. and anticipate what the benefit would be if we could prevent it. and the dilemma is that approach is not consistent with the way the process for rule making is written. and so we are really struggling with being able to demonstrate that even though that bad thing hasn't happened yet, if it were to happen, it would likely cause this kind of cost and investing and presenting that cost is worth it to society. for having very pointed and difficult conversations within the administration quite often on these kind of concept and issues.

but i do think that we will be successful in many of the areas and be able to continue to move the safety board because we can demonstrate the cost is justified by the benefit that we might see. let me talk for a minute on flight duty in that context. i know any of your travel by the reality or by the fact that we had to draw some lines and finalizing that role. and at this point, the rule does not include pilots to fly all cargo operations. it was a difficult decision throughout the administration. but i think at the end, we and everyone involved in the discussions coming to the conclusion that we could in fact properly justify the investment that would need to be made to affect the passenger carrying flights. you'll hear the administrator leader in your conference, but i can assure you kiev the secretary continue to work quite

hard and raising the issue with the cargo operators to consider -- to look at the science that informed the rules that we sit for passenger carrying operations, and to consider those principles as they look at their own schedules. an important piece i think a made it -- that allowed us to come to that ultimate conclusion was that we do have a requirement in the statute and it affects cargo operators, so they must have the flight fatigue risk management plans. so we are working with the cargo operators to make sure they are looking at the scientific principles that underlie the passenger carrying rules to make sure that as they do their fatigue risk management plans that they are looking at those same concept. let me just touch for a minute on one next gen as a key priority for faa and accomplishing a level of safety. i think what we see within the faa is that the system calls as

the aircraft to become really the center for the system, which my friends and air-traffic and i'm not defending him we've always thought the aircraft was the center of the system. i like to regularly reminded them they have nothing control if they didn't let them into the system. so it is important that we understand the kinds of technology that the aircraft is able to take with it wherever it goes. that means it is taking its safety infrastructure with it when it goes to parts of the world that will never have the ground based infrastructure that canada and on and the u.s. are able to provide for example or europe provides. so operations into africa, latin america throughout asia can have the same level of safety that we can experience in the more developed markets, because the aircraft can bring the number of those safety systems with it and reduce that risk. so that is another one of our key initiatives. in closing i think what's important for all of us to keep in mind is we can't accomplish any of this if we are not always working together if we are not always understanding what are

the risks that are in the system and identify ways we can mitigate those risks are voluntarily, hopefully come and if necessary by regulation. so i look forward to the conversation with you and the rest of the panel. thank you. >> thank you, peggy. let's turn now to canada. and here from transport canada, what their priorities are in the regulatory environment. martin? >> thank you come chuck and for the opportunity to come to i want to do a little a decree on where we are coming at the opportunity to come and express some of -- to share the experiences and perspectives. i would like to acknowledge a lot of what you do includes members so it is an organization to get i was just thinking as we talk this morning everything matters and i fully support that. i was also also looking in the context of the decision here in

the security this morning and i think the conclusion on my own mind is in a risk-based world, and a conscious decision not to do some of the things so that it will lower the end of the spectrum that you are dealing with them as opposed to just not dealing with them. so the two things are impossible to reconcile. everything this matter but sometimes you have to make a decision you can't do it all. that is an attraction between the two. just a little bit of background, the absolute number of accidents continues to drop despite increasing traffic the accident rate continues to drop, so as with north america the whole u.s. particularly we have a strong record that doesn't mean we can sit back. we are challenged as peggy said to get into some of the things which are hardly justified but it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. it's very clear that the association such as alpa h a strong role to play.

we talked about collaboration. a regulator can't do it all sitting and watching the regulation doesn't mean much in the context in engaging the associations, having them engage members. one of the things i often get into the discussion about is the association's role a lot of them thai in the role to lobby government but at the same time it also to make sure the membership understands the need of the government and those two directions. so the associations to take on the responsibility, understanding our approach, helping educate members is equally important in my view. there is no question that an organization alpa is very strategic, and i think that plays a huge leap into the safety record. associations tend to be issues based. we don't always get that perspective, so it's very valuable to we do see it. in terms of moving forward, there is no question continuous improvement. the word that hasn't come up this morning but is fundamental is quality assurance. i know within the faa they've

done a lot of work on quality assurance. a lot of the operations that we have to move forward on sms we always have the quality in place, so it's very hard to introduced continuous improvement philosophy when in fact people are not using the quality assurance. so, finding ways to build that in as a part is a key part of the puzzle. what we have done as we have undergone a lot of training in the last few years and i just want to talk a little bit about that. internally, we have also made you aware of an organization. we realize that if we were going to be successful in an sms or systems based approach, we also need to deal with companies at an enterprise level. so we completely reorganized both our rulemakings so it is done in one place so it wasn't focused on particular. and the delivery level making sure we can deal with a company if we have a sms to the whole company it's not an operating flight. those things need to come together. so we feel the need to

completely rebuild the organization. that's always an opportunity in the sense of trying to correct some of the things that may be in the past you haven't gotten right. it's a huge challenge but in defining the work, keeping the word going in the process but also making sure we look after people and treat them fairly. we do believe we have a lot of progress. we are expecting a majority of that work to be finished by the end of this fiscal year which is the end of march and it's taken a long time but that is partly because we didn't remove the boxes. we've completely restructure debt. within that, again, a lot of managing risk is part of the way we do business. and we have to factor that into, you know, focusing internally as well as dealing with the external risk and the way we do our own work. the next plane to view we continued on the road of implementing sms. we have come a long way which also means we have learned a great deal. clearly sms is what we expect the industry to do we're a lot of the work also looks at our own surveillance program to make

sure that our role in the perspective of sms is clear. how we operate as a regulator. and more recently, the initiative is to love look at the enforcement side of what we do and how do you deal with that in systems based approach? so we are trying very hard to bring all these things together and we are getting towards some kind of closure, ultimately looking for stability in the organization of the program. we did put a hold in 2000 - moving for word sms in some areas. we got a lot of feedback the industry wasn't necessarily ready. employees were not necessarily at the point they were comfortable. what we are just in the process of doing is essentially doing a risk assessment of moving forward. what are the things we need to put in place to make it right to move forward. their third question, principals of sms we believe apply in every area but it's also clear that how you apply that to a

mom-and-pop type of flooding and that is on an airline to in some cases what we have a sms or would supply some of the principals in a different way, that's exactly the work that we are hoping to do in the next few months. so we have a plan on how we are moving forward. today sms covers all the major carriers, airports, canada. there's a huge part of the system and what we're seeing is the companies that do understand and get it and move into the culture, they see the benefits from a safety and operational point of view. we continue to be convinced that it is the right direction to go. one of the things we introduced this year is a new tool. we were very excited as a risk profile lintel where we look at risk indicators, the get a company, look at changes in the company. changing staff, expansion of the fleet and the root structure. basically generating a standardized risk profile across

the country to a centralized program that helps us see the relative risk both within the region, between regions, between the types of holding so that gives us a much better ability to be more consistent on our risk and we were dealing with a lot of those things locally. we have yet to see whether it's -- it works and we have to decipher yet at this point we have a lot of sense and it's certainly something we would be happy to share as we move forward. at the same time, we are trying very hard to be productive working with companies. we can't lose sight of the fact that we need to do that consistently so we are very clear in developing our own political but also being clear with the industry we want to give you credit for what you do that if people take culbert steps to avoid regulations we also need to be quick to deal with that. the next piece of to touch on the fed was 20 years our

consulting process. i would sell the one hand it's been very effective and from the consultation point of view it hasn't necessarily become efficient in terms of the process these working groups tend to take a lot of their own sometimes and in a sense it is hard to draw conclusions in terms of the dialogue, the paper work, so we are willing to go in a process to try to maintain that consultation that the same time make it more nimble and respond and we see there is a lot of technology and social media perhaps we can use today that would help us in the engagement but a much more flexible and dynamic way. in recent times tsb reports together accidents where there was a need to work quickly so we took this as an opportunity to look at how we do things on the working side ansi is there a way to question and set up a working

group that we felt was going to take a long time. we ended up in each case establishing a focus group and this was to get people to go through the issue. the accidents you're probably familiar one was the cougar helicopter accident on the east coast of canada and offshore helicopter operation when we talk about not 19 passengers and as we talk about the smaller airlines. the second one was on the plane accident we have always of west coast we probably of the world's largest commercial flight operation in terms of the numbers. so, when we talk about one level of safety how do we do things like that for the offshore operations and how do you compare that with the major airlines again? so that is clearly on the go and the cost of doing that can be different. we need to find ways to differentiate while achieving a meaningful level of safety. part of the reason for being

here today is to foster that collaborative peace with alpa and other organizations and with the faa we have a lot of interaction not necessarily at the bye level that there's a lot of contact between the two organizations and i think that helps us along the way. the focus for the mentioned to get back to the rulemaking process we see that as a leading to the rule making on what we plan to do is at the end of the focus groups to identify what we are doing it the flexibility that we see is we are not necessarily talking about an npa that if an industry focuses or combines the focus group we find that industry best practices that can be interest-free quickly while we take the time to do rulemakings mabey guidance material in the short term is more effective having the specter of tools we find we can have that discussion as a package of any way we didn't always do very well we did the

rule first and then the guidance in the industry afterwards. as we get into a process, there's a lot to be done to improve the process itself and getting off to a quick and effective start to make a difference. ..

>> let's change gears for a little bit here, and turned over to one of our other, you know, one of our industry stakeholders and that's the airlines. let's get the airlines perspective on the assignment, the regulatory revision environment right now, and that process in setting priorities. tom? >> thank you, chuck, and good morning. i appreciate the opportunity to provide air finds view of aviation safety. as you all are aware we are enjoying a period of extraordinary safety performance in the u.s. airline industry. and this did not just happen by chance to over the last two decades we change our view of safety, how we manage risk, how we collaborate amongst different stakeholders, and our performance is a model for the world. as i said earlier, this did not just happen by chance. it's taken the cooperation of employees, of airlines

themselves, manufacturers of labor groups, of our regulators. and we worked very diligently to identify the risks using data driven approaches, and to start to manage that very deliberate deliberately. haiti and her organization at the faa has provided a lot of leadership in this regard. i also serve on the commercial aviation safety team and the aviation safety information analysis and sharing system, which is a mouthful, but these are very important efforts we've been able to engage employees and airlines and collective -- collect massive amounts of data, a identify the dead and assembled high level deep analysis on where the risks like. one of the discussion 20 years ago we are having tended to be binary and operation was either saved or unsaved. now our system is extraordinary safe. we will never win safety. will always improve our safety performance.

but we are not able to talk more about how we manage risk. i would offer that the u.s. airline industry is a model for the world in how we manage risk but let me give you an example of that. as a retired airline captain i've had the opportunity to fly boeing aircraft into kansas city and into ecuador. i can tell you that the safety of those flights are both very solid at a very high level, but the challenges we face in those different operate in environments are completely different. anyone who is flown into the andes region in south america will tell you that the set of risks are just different than flying into the heartland of america, if you will. and airlines working with our regulars, without inspectors are very deliberately managing this risk on a daily basis, on a flight by flight basis. and i think we are a model for many other industries. in fact, other india trees are seeking out expertise in the

airlines to have discussions about how we manage risk. so would spend not one person, not one party. it's been the entire culture of aviation, improving continually looking for additional data to do deep analysis on how we manage this risk. we help set the policy framework here in washington, but it's the employees out in the field, the inspectors out in the field that have enjoyed this change of culture, where they are able to provide us with this, these voluntary, voluntarily provide set of data that we can analyze an immoral for basis. and franco we are onto something. is working very well. again, we will never declare that we have conquered safety. we will always strive to get better. of the method we're using now are highly effective. they're very deliberate. they are very measurable and it is taking the cooperation of everyone on this panel,

including output and other organizations to be able to achieve that. so i would offer that if we should always have delivered and frank discussions about new regulations. we are certainly a pretty good at that and i think peggy what a great and everyone up here would agree. but we are at a point now where we have access to data that we have never had before. we would have access to analysis that we have never had before. and our ability to look at and its future and try to predict what these future risks are by looking at the data is extraordinary and we anticipate it's just going to get better. so u.s. airlines are committed to this. we are partners fully with our employees, with our regulator, with the labor organizations out there, but it's really people out there, the pilots, the dispatches, the air traffic controllers, and maintenance technicians. our culture has changed in the u.s. where everyone wants to take the risk out of the system so we never get to that unsafe situation. we are managing below that level

in a very effective manner. thank you. >> thank you, tom. i think one of the points you brought up is the challenges between flying domestically and flying in the international arena. and i think it's interesting now to get a global perspective, particularly faa and transport canada worked very closely with icao and adopting standards developed by ikea. let's hear from mitch and get into some of the processes at icao. >> good morning, everybody, and before i begin my opening remarks, let me just thank the organizing committee for inviting icao to participate in your air safety forum. we really appreciate that opportunity. i would also like to pass on the very best wishes of our secretary-general, mr. raymond benjamin, and my boss, nancy graham, for a very successful for him.

i think as many of you know, icao was an outcome of the chicago convention in 1944. in fact, the world at that time them 51 states, actually 52 states, were invited by president roosevelt to attend the chicago convention. it was a realization at the time that technology had gone far enough that international civil aviation would really be a major mover and shaker of the world in the future. president roosevelt in his message to the conference reminded the 52 countries that were present to undertake a task of the highest importance. and he urged the conference participants to work together so that air may be used by humanity to serve humanity. so, many years later, there are 191 member countries of icao, soon-to-be 192 member countries.

the convention would not be possible nor with the framework of international civil aviation if it wasn't for an international collaborative approach among countries, but also the industry. and i'd like to add, i think peggy is absolutely right you are a part of the industry. i find it interesting that your international voice at icao was formed very soon after the convention in 1944. it was formed in 1948. is a realization that you have a unique perspective on international salvation operations. and that your voice needed to be heard on an international basis in order for us to have that one level of aviation safety, because of your perspective. over the past few years, icao has intensified its engagement or reach out to some of the largest regulars of the world.

and industry. for the first time that i can ever remember in my 21 years with icao, we asked the faa, and some other major regulators to tell us their view for rulemaking over the next five to 10 years. it's only through this that we can sure the relevancy of our work program at icao. however, we are not doing this without due consideration of all of our member states. if we are to achieve that one level of safety. in fact, it's those states that struggle so much to implement the international standards that icao puts forward into their regulatory framework that gives us a reality check. we're doing that very same same thing with industry, including the pilot community. we reached out to various international organizations to

see what their safety and efficiency goals are over the next few years. we need to pull together through a set of harmonized objectives to achieve even higher levels of safety and efficiency. i started my career in the united states as a pilot. i was a line private, and like many line pilots, i really didn't know they much about icao. i didn't really know why i should care. it's a fair question, and the very strong role, the faa, transport canada have in your day-to-day operations. the faa or transport canada as your regular, and jeff accountability to them. so let's be clear on that. however, what comes out of icao and the icao mechanism eventually does have a direct effect on all of you. let me give you an example. as you know when you fly into another country's airspace you

have to abide by the rules and regulations of that country. there's an exception to that. if the regulations which govern the issuance of your pilot certificate meet the minimum requirements of the icao standards, then it receives an automatic multilateral recognition. in effect, you're one of the exporter pulls in the international civil aviation framework. and this recognition of your certificate support a system where you are really not required to meet numerous standards or regulations of other countries. you are required to meet those regulations of your country. so what comes out of icao in this area, and many other areas, does have a direct effect on you as a pilot. so let me talk to you a little bit about what icao is up to in some areas i think that are most important to you.

peggy mentioned fatigue risk metasystem. this is an area that icao, thanks to the work of many different countries, the faa, transport canada, the airline pilots association, and many other organizations, as of november 2011 we established new standards for fatigue risk management systems. those are in place. they are available for use by the 191 member countries of icao. thanks to the support of the pilot community and ayotte, we been able to go around the world and discuss these new standards with the regulators with the operators and the pilot community. and we are hoping that these will become of increasing use in the future. i heard a discussion about risk based approaches. icao is increasingly taking a data driven approach towards the safety programs in a similar manner as cast in the united states. we've learned a lot of lessons from cast.

we've identified three high priority needs in international civil aviation. east should be no surprise to any of you. they are associate with runway excursions, loss of control in flight, and controlled flight into terrain. through our corroboration with the faa and other regulators, and a pilot community, we have made it translates in the avoidance of controlled flight into terrain. we have a very active program now in runway safety, including runway incursions and also excursions. we are now advancing our work to address the loss of control in flight. i read a very interesting article this morning that a worldwide that may account for up to about a 5000 fatalities over the last 10 years in international civil aviation. i am very pleased and very

grateful to see that the faa has brought its aviation rules committee meetings outside the united states to montréal, to icao. we applaud this wonderful effort, and initiative to get allows the international community to benefit on the insights of the process, but also allows for an exchange of best practices on an international basis. from an icao perspective this will go along way to enable us to work on international trading -- training guidance materials. and in a worst case, recovery training from upsets in flight this is truly a win-win. i expect that this will result in better international guidance on training and possible new international standards that would apply to personal licensing and operations training. closely associated with this topic is recruit training for

pilots. we've embarked with industry through iata with a strong assistance on an initiative on how we conduct returned simulator training. on an international basis, this may result in a substantial paradigm shift on how we conduct such training. i well recall my own recurrent training checks in a simulator. and regards of whether that recurrent training check was in a 747 or the a320, they were pretty predictable. that checks were pretty predictable. however, the evidence shows that contribute factors for incidents and accidents have changed significantly with different generations of airplanes. the notion of what we refer to as evidence-based training is very similar to aqp. gather the data and structure the training to identify needs.

we are working very hard on this approach for both the developed and developing countries, but we are also cognizant that we need your acceptance, because you do the training. many of you may be aware of the existence of the icao multi-crew pilot license. this is probably the newest license in icao for 40, maybe even 50 years. the approach is complex, yet quite simple. train the next generation of aviation airline pilots for what they will need to do, define what they wanted to do in measurable and observable terms called competencies. did we get it right? will the jury still out? personally, i think we did. but we need the measurement or the evidence. we made a commitment to you and

the international civil aviation community that we would do a proof of concept, and while we are a little bit late to do the resources, we shall do so. we will review the data, entering the fourth quarter of 2013, we will invite the world to discuss the evidence and best practices and proof of concept symposia. look we look for to a strong private participation. in 2006, tried to introduce new standards for age limits, the so-called curtailment of privileges. that allows the captain to fly up to age 65. the standard also allows for, only in the case of first officer of course is below 60. it also allows for the first officer to fly beyond 60, as long as the captain is below 60. it's the so called over under limits.

when this new standard was approved, we were also tasked after five years of experience to review the amendments. we have begun to collect the data from states and international organizations. we've also collected information from research, and we will finish our analysis fairly soon here there's been a great amount of interest expressed in a allowing both crewmembers to fly past the age of 60, but once again we will have to rely on the data and the views of states and international organizations. we are only in a that are caching data analysis stage, until we have the results of this we will not be in a position to present any new proposals. something that is very near and dear to my heart is how much fuel is carried on board every flight. recently, the council of icao has adopted new standards concerning fuel carriage. it's an update to standards that go back as far as 1958.

they are more exacting. now, make no mistake about the the motivation behind the was efficiency and, of course, the knock on effects to the environment. about efficiency was the motivator, the new standards have safety benefits as well? as an integral part to these new standards, well-defined phraseology's that will provide a globally harmonized means to communicate with atc in the event priority handling is needed. we are grateful to a number of states that help us to develop these new standards and arrive at global consensus. in particular we are grateful to the faa, to iata and alpa that helps us draft these new standards. as most of you know, fly

internationally, even from the united states to canada, the phraseology used for flying or not flying the vertical profile for these procedures varies from one country to the next. this situation opens the door for confusion, and international aviation community came to icao for a solution. have developed a proposed solution, and this is now with member states and international organizations for consultation. i am aware that this may cause some countries to at least consider changes to their phraseology. phraseology we have been using for quite some time. we are now in the hands of our member countries and international organizations for their opinion on this proposal. i've heard nextgen mentioned several times. and certainly there are safety and efficiency benefits to be realized from nextgen. as there are in europe.

we know that these systems will offer great benefits. however, icao is actively engaged with the leadership and experts that are developing these systems so that we can achieve a seamless, seamless operations. but what about the rest of the world? if we are to achieve one level of safety, if we are to improved efficiency, then we have to do quite a bit of reach it. in this day and age where aircraft can find a halfway around the world, if we don't introduce these new technologies beyond the originating states, we will not fully read the safety and efficiency benefits. as result of our work with these programs, we will be proposing the concept of aviation system block upgrades to the international community in november after 12 and navigation conference. the block upgrades comprise various operational improvements

aimed at harmonizing and improving the efficiency of the global internet vacation system. to aid in harmonizing the block upgrades, upgrades are supported, they are supported by roadmaps for surveillance, as well as information management and avionics. interestingly, the so-called block zero is aimed to best utilizing what you have on most of your modern airplanes today. we look forward to this pivotal meeting for the future of civil aviation and we are grateful to your technical expertise that will be shared during the meeting through your international association. ultimately, icao is a consensus building organization, and it's only through our work together that we can advance international civil aviation safety and efficiency in the future. thank you, chuck. >> mitchell, thank you very much. okay, let's hear now from the

pilots perspective, sean, you and i work a lot on safety issues for this association. let's hear, let's have you share with the audience what goes into our strategy and what our priorities are for safety. >> sure. one of the nice things about going last on a panel is using other, and scribbling notes and keen on certain things that use it. first of all i would like to thank you for introducing me as a distinguished panelists which makes me feel really old. every day. but the first thing i kind of keep on was the term in just. i haven't seen any of the remarks that were presented yet, and it's something that i immediately had me riveted on one thing. and that's what is the role of alpa? what is the role of alpa in terms of advancing the safety culture, advancing industry safety, because it's really easy to understand what the regulars roll is. what agee and martin on both sides of the border where the

stop the standard. sometimes they are described through legislation. sometimes become internally because of data-driven reasons, because of high risk factors which kind of leaders to a certain prescribed requirement for us to go and fly out airplanes. with tom is easy to understand industries role because they write our paychecks. they by the airplanes, they buy the gas. they create payroll, and i'm glad that with a very good relationship with him, but it's also again easy to understand what the role of the industry reps are. it's also easy to understand what the role of the folks who set the standards at the international level at the icao level with the 191 member states at icao. basic international standards for recommended practices. so sometimes we referred to as industry. sometimes we are referred to as labor. sometimes it is set in a positive light somewhat, and sometimes it a little bit perjurer give.

so it a little bit of a controversial note to start by talking about what we are not but maybe that will lead us into what we are. now, it's been said many times and it's absolutely true, we're the largest non-governmental safety organization in the world. we have 53,000 members in 37 airlines on both sides of the border. which defines us as the biggest pilot or position in the world as well. we're also the biggest member at the international level which represent 101 member associations in roughly as many states. so one would think that having 53,000 pilots, would automatically entitle us to have clout to give us some kind of organizational inertia. i'm here to tell you, at the risk of sounding off-color, size is not all that matters. it's how you use that mass. it's how you kind of deploy. so how does alpa fit within the context of these organizations,

these distinguished representatives here? i would say that first thing is that we all recognize and we saw on the incredible video this morning that we are the visual pulse of the industry. we are the gut check. with folks are out on the front line who are blind the flights in juneau, who are flying into dulles, who have long crew days, challenging situations with weather, with -- i was talking to tom about a new requirement that just actually came out at midnight last night, which addresses opposing direction operations. that directly resulted in a diversion over my property because of our requirements to make sure we met a new standard of make sure getting it sorted out. so we have the ability based upon our experience, the footprint that we have, to give a very good vernacular, a very good understanding of what's

happening on the front line. the next thing we do very well, which is also why we have organizational influence, is we have superb technical folks. not only are they out there experiencing all the rigors of life on the line, but they are also raising their hands like he saw on the video with a 420 folks, and that doesn't even include the local mobile operators, pilots, and they roll up their sleeves and they get very, very heavily involved. very, very high level of technical work. it happens every day. in fact, tom is going to go down to the road to the next subcommittee meeting. i'm involved in that as well, and in order for me to be effective at that level i need to turn to my experts at chuck hogan, like mike, like others whcan give me very, very good decisive usable advice on what our position should be, how we should move the ball forward in terms of technical data with,

for instance, few metrics that demonstrate the effectiveness of nextgen principles and procedures, and the fuel savings that we can realize. without the front-line experience now combined with the technical activity, we are kind of a riderless she. we're very focused driven. i think were very effective. the other thing that we also do very well is we work for a collaboratively in the advocacy role. i have sat on panels with peggy. i've been with tom. discussing, for instance, the issues of what would happen if we allow the company to come and that would completely -- in which all of our satellite-based navigation is incumbent upon. it was high level advocacy, collaborative work that was able to hit a resident know with our legislators, with the folks who make key decisions that

influence our lives. .. the strategic thinking. i think that, you know, saying everything matters is great. everything does matter but you also have to have strategic relations and long-term planning and identify what are the things when you're looking at autrey ghosh, when you are looking at

identifying the high level things you have to focus on, how do you set the order? how do you prioritize when you're going to work on? fortunately we have the broad context of the one level of safety and security. that's kind of the atmosphere that we work but how do you drill down and make effective change in terms of rulemaking activity? i would say one great example that peggy brought up is sms. we are at the cusp of having a will come out which defines and gives the tools of our companies can use, all of our operators can use, all of the maintainers and everybody else that can aggregate of the amazing amount of data that we have to the programs and power ports and everything else that create a tailored risk-based way of advancing safety specific to that airline. it's not one-size-fits-all. dfa publishes the advisory circulators would say here is the boilerplate.

and how you can work internally and how to improve safety but it's up to us to work with a partner to make sure that we can bring that in such a way that makes for that airline. nextgen is another one of those atmospheric terms and my 33,000 ft definition of nextgen is it uses policies and procedures to increase the density of air traffic and for the airports for that matter while preserving the same margin of safety for advancing it. that's what we are doing right now using what tom was talking about and that is data driven approach is doing risk-based analysis, that's looking at the things we can do right now to make sure that we can get more activity going into these aggregation of airports otherwise known as metroplex activity and do so in a way that we have more ridges if you will going to the pipeline without any sacrifice to safety. i come from alaska airlines which is a pioneer in our net

based operations. we are able to take the front line expertise and bring it into policy levels where hopefully we are going to start executing on some of the things the faa has defined as a kind of keep portals as part of our nextgen road map. if we have another two hours i think we can jump into the unmanned aircraft systems and remotely piloted aircraft because there's an extremely tight timeline that's interrupted by the legislature by some timber 30th and 2015 we are supposed to be able to have dhaka least a framework established for fully integrated operations where commercial activities and unmanned aircraft will coexist and non-segregated airspace and incredibly ambitious, tight timeline. the essay has set the framework, set the table with centralizing

all the work activity through a joint planning office under a very capable person but again it's going to require us to work for a collaborative lee and i can look around this audience and pick about 30% of you right now already involved in that and probably don't even know at. so, you know, we have the endgame, the priority to establish. we are thinking strategically. we are applying the risk-based principles to that capri of things that falls under the umbrella of what constitutes the work activity when we use the term everything matters. i will just kind of clothes a little bit off base just like i started. i am sure everybody has been watching the london olympics and for some of the athletes in the olympics, four years ago in beijing maybe they fell short of the market, maybe if they were half a second of their interval timer something, they dedicated their next four years of their

life towards achieving that have a second off the last time for whatever in the swimming pool or in the 10k or whatever. they have such an extremely the elite level of fitness they have to push that much harder for the next four years to shave half a second of their time. i think it's very analogous to what position we are in right now. we have an extremely high level of safety fitness. we have the most safe transportation system in the history of the world over the last ten years, which just follows the next safest decade in the history of transportation and the world. as we would say that is a very high class problem to have, and as tom said we need to keep pushing forward. it's through the collaborative work through risk-based approach

is to figure out how we can shave that second off when we keep on moving the ctr forward. all of the low hanging fruit is gone and it's only for the concerted efforts and collaboration and really this is not high wash that we are talking about. every single day our folks with their industry partners are sitting down with these folks right here figuring out how we can shave off the last half a second. thanks for your interest. >> thank you. our work is never done in the safety world as we know so i would like to open up for questions and answers you have a fabulous opportunity here to talk to certainly the regulators here in the united states and canada and icao and alpa of course. let's begin. sir thomas the journeyman organization your present.

>> returning transfer legal enterprise. my question is for ms. gilligan. i very much appreciate faa's high-level prairies for safety and voluntary safety programs. we are very exciting to launch a program. however, we have met a sort of road block at the local faa level where i believe our local faa officials feel a mandate in the post cold an era if you will. i believe they may have a mandate from the oig to bring a more get-tough approach with enforcement and oval site -- oversight. it seems to be kind of dissident in our attempt to move forward

to a more open-minded and implicit collaborative approach to safety. is sort of seems like the approach is more to shoot your wounded more than to bring them up and move forward towards safer cockpits. my passion is training and i think that's where the link comes from high level priorities to the cockpit is through training. my question is where would a guy like me begin to see if we can reshape the thinking on a local level because we can't seem to quite get it out of our local problem, the road block. >> i'm not particularly familiar with the road block might be so let me say a couple things. first of all i think as you know for aqp we have a policy that is set for aqp and it's been involved in the approval of aqp

programs, so it may be necessary for you or someone from the airline or both to reach out to the national level that you think somehow the policies that should be applied to the aqp approval and oversight process aren't being followed. and we have a process for doing that. within the agency to elevate those kind of issues because it isn't uncommon for safety professionals to disagree on things and for an inspector or engineer at a local level to perhaps have a different perspective or perhaps at the national level we can see more flexibility in the policy and how to get all the parties to an agreement so you may want to consider that. in terms of enforcement generally, it is always a balance that we struggle quite honestly sometimes to hit. we are very clear the national level that enforcement is one tool but just one tool in the toolkit for enhancing safety and

broadly to the system most of our inspectors see that as one of the tools of they have. i met yesterday with a class of our new employees folks that have been with us between a year and two years and almost to a person the inspectors there can first of all from the industry themselves and are very much involved in their certificate holders working together to enhance safety. if you would like to speak for a minute afterwards and give me some specifics i will see if i can help you in the specifics circumstance but whatever your experience is you are broadening behind what i think is happening in the system more broadly. >> let's go over to this site. >> good morning. the national president of the union employees come and my questions are directed to martin neley. you're referenced in your her

presentation parliament putting a hold on either sms, and that was done to the minister in 2009, following extensive consultations through the parliamentary committee. he further stated that you are now moving forward with sms, and you are now at this stage you are prepared to move forward. issues and concerns we have raised throughout the implementation of sms and our position remains the same, then it must be an additional layer of safety and not a replacement player to the roles and responsibilities that transport canada has an oversight and inspection. you did not mention this morning how you are moving forward with speed and whether it will be an

additional layer for a replacement player, and i find it very interesting that the first we are told of this moving forward with sms is through this alpa international conference. so i would like to ask you specifically how you are moving forward with sms. >> thank you, christine. a couple of clarification is to start moving forward on the sms was taken at my level based on concerns that a more senior levels of there was no direction to stop. we took a look at it and realized there were things we needed to resolve before we move forward. we have not yet made a decision to move forward. what we are doing is looking at those things in today's context. we have made a lot of progress we believe in a lot of areas. part of that is the action plan that i think you are familiar with. we talk about it in there that we could do an assessment of the

conditions under which we are ready to move forward again. once we identify those conditions we will be communicating them. if i were this morning i apologize to move forward in a structured way so that decision hasn't been made. >> follow-up question if i may. has a decision been made whether it is a replacement player or an additional layer to the of the vroom rules of transport canada? >> the way we currently have it set up is in addition to all of the existing requirements that continues to be the case and the would be the case moving forward. thank you. >> i am the director of safety information analysis programs here at alpa and also on the issues and analysis team for science. thank you all for coming. i have won favor to ask another question and i lost the fever just in case you don't like the question.

this is for peggy and tom. if you could emphasize the to our industry partners of the airline's how important it is that they include the pilots in their programs. we still have focal programs we deal with where alpa is excluded and i realize the faa can't force airlines to do that. i know that you were here represented the airline's so if you can pass that message a long i would appreciate it. during my question to use the time we are able to either include international carriers start a process like sis on an icao type of industry.

>> we are seeing the value that we get from the integration of data and it's got to be helpful to be the will to do that at an international level. we have some -- we've taken some baby steps along the path. i think you probably know we have had a request to the latin american citigroup to share some data and we have been able to agree to do that and so what they do is ask us for an analysis. we don't give them the raw data that we give them an analysis of activities that we are seeing for our operators are seeing a certain airports in central and south america so that they can incorporate that into their analysis and we have an agreement icao with the faa to look at how we might start to integrate some of the data sources as well. there are a lot of legal limitations i think you know there are an awful lot of countries where the kind of protection for example but we are able to afford the data in

the u.s. is not in place yet and in some locations it may never be able to be put in place. we are always going to be balancing the protection elements that is so important to the underpinnings of the program which can better integrate data around the world as we can be sure we are getting the broadest picture. it's going to be a series of baby steps we figured we can share with and we see what we can learn from that and then we can share those lessons more broadly but i think we are definitely looking towards that path. >> thank you petraeus too you may want to comment on the icao partnership agreement. >> we are very grateful to the faa as regards the initiative in latin america and in sharing some information. it's very important for many of the airports in latin america that are quite challenging to take a look at the data and some

of the possible mitigating measures that could be taken. yes, i see some expansion in the future. the sharing of safety information we have the agreement in place as it pertains to many countries around the world sharing hct information is not always very easy. it can be challenging. you're talking about different legal frameworks and different philosophies. so, we are trying to influence that and certainly we are trying to move forward in the guidance we get to the states on the protection of safety information so we have a lot of work to do. >> thank you. >> dennis landry with adel tough formerly with northwest. i would like to congratulate the canadians on the creation and adoption of a very successful winter operation friction measurement program known as

kirby. i was the director of the special project committee chairman like northwest alpa, and that was one of our big problems. during my efforts, the faa had somehow convinced most airports to begin reporting the new values and we were quite successful for a while. and i've noticed in the last year the frequency of new volume reporting has been fewer and fewer, and right now seldom can i find the new value report unless the company has specifically required the airport to deliver that information. what i and a stand as the engineers have perhaps decided it's not entirely reliable but it's an important tool to the pilots and i would like to know perhaps the faa has any more

ongoing efforts to end this information back into our toolbox. again, what canadians have done is move to be incredibly valuable tool in our toolbox for sales operations. perhaps he might comment on that and i realize this is a cold question. i will take that back to see why this particular tool is not readily available during the operations. >> i think there is some disagreement just about how valuable new values really are both with an essay and within the community so it is an airport pergamon responsible the other to collect new values. it's not a requirement for the airport in order to hold its

certification. but i will to the question back to the airport division to see if there is any particular work being done either on encouraging the new value reporting were looking at small alternative. i'm sure you are aware there's a lot of all technology alternatives that are being looked into. there is a certain amount of research being done to find a way to measure friction that may be more effective than the new value, but i will be glad to get something back through other folks here at alpa to get you a direct answer. >> thank you very much. >> i wanted to start by thanking the faa for the science based approach that you took. i think it was a good process. the process was sound right up to the point the office of management and budget cut the cargo carriers out because what they said was the cost

significantly outweighed the societal benefits. the science supports the fact that the pilots have the same as passenger pilots. the faa felt compelled to include cargo carriers in the original rulemakings. i guess my question is how we justify the thought process that cost is more important than safety, and how can we remedy that? >> as i said even in my opening remarks i think it's important that we understand what the cost and benefits of any of the rules we put forward will be so that the society understands that. and i think in this case as in so many cases, we have to look for other ways to try to address the risk. that's why we are encouraged that he could risk management plans are already in place of the cargo carriers and we are going to continue to use that as a tool to work with the cargo carriers to make sure they are looking at how the science is as we understand it now applies to the schedules they are putting together and there was in their

plan. they are training pilots on what the fatigue risks are and how the pilot might manage it and to actually be changing their schedules when they identify a level of risk that we may find to be unacceptable. the outcome for the rulemakings i think at this point is what it is we will see where the litigation goes and the west will change outcomes. we need to see where that goes. but more important is there are lots of ways to skin a cat and we are going to continue to pursue all of those other alternatives working with the cargo operators and the pilots to make sure the risk is reduced within the structure, within the regulatory structure that we have now. >> as a follow-on, you mentioned the fatigue risk-management. i think that is a great part. i think it makes the rules flexible which is really what we need. you mentioned we need to look in other directions how to deal with of the risk.

the science supports the fact the risk is the same regardless what you are carrying in their plan, so really we are basically cut out for cost so how do we justify that when the risk is the same? >> i think the best i can tell you is that the analysis would require that we identify with the particular costs are to different segments of the industry against the benefits to that particular segment of the industry and what we are facing now is the challenge for how to mitigate that risked using other tools besides rulemakings and i think we have a good path and it's a statutory requirement to have the fatigue risk management plans we have a good path working with the industry to make sure the risk is being reduced whether under the regulation or in this case under the fatigue risk planning that they are required to do.

>> ms. gilligan i do have a question for you and it's probably another request for a favor. >> according to mike i really effective. >> i suspect you are i am the central chair for massa airlines international training chair command yy tremendously appreciate our relationship together on the national level, my question is what can we all do to facilitate that relationship at the cmo level? >> i'm not sure i completely understand. maybe i do. this has come up before the local doesn't have a relationship with the cmo because obviously we deal with the organization that holds our sick certificate but having said that i do think that many especially as a result of the

programs have seen value and i guess all three of the parties have seen value in having all three of the players up the table addressing certain issues. the best i could advise is continue to reach out. i think our inspectors is the regulatory link is to the operator. you hold particular significance in a different way but in terms of the organization of the airline's that's our sicced can't link and the regulatory link but i don't think it is anybody's intention to exclude anybody from the conversation so i would just encourage you to continue to reach out and offer what you can to assist helping to address the safety concerns. obviously it is helpful if your operator brings you to the table as well. i don't think it's reasonable to expect faa is going to be about to bring the mec if they are not on monday to increasing u.s. also it's important to have that working relationship on the safety issues understanding it

will be industrial but on the safety side we would encourage operators to include all of their union representatives as we try to solve safety problems. >> i will continue to try to build those relationships and i think you for your help in assisting us as well. >> hello, chairman of the division for the association. feel free to ask martin. [laughter] >> one of the things we have in canada is we lack the protection of the voluntary safety reporting. right now in canada labour code so when a pilot skills out and asap it becomes a company document and that could be discovered by another

organization that wants to find out what the pilot is doing. we talked earlier about that and i would really like to pursue canada having protection for the voluntary safety reporting. martin mentioned earlier the increased collaboration in doing a risk assessment and moving on on how we are going to address sms in canada. and i would like to know do you see the professional pilot organization alpa, the pilots association and others as being stakeholders in that risk assessment process? >> i'm not sure if i know the answer to that yet. i know there's a lot of information being gathered in our risk assessment process we always have the ability to bring people in the technical expertise. i am not sure what the plan is at the moment. i will add one comment though. one of the things we learned along the way in terms of dealing with looking at the flight times and moving towards the management systems when you

get into some of these smaller operators, the pilots don't have a voice. we can deal with larger airlines whether we are dealing with alpa and we have the ability to do that but the small operators don't have any voice. so we give the operators the sense of the concerns they have about flight duty times and operations in the extreme case if you like but we don't have a way to communicate with the pilots, so the same sort of thing applies in sms when we get into the smaller groups. some of the association's are starting to work with the smaller operators and the other provincial associations. but we don't always have a common voice switching very hard to make sure we get a balance between them if you like on the other hand of the spectrum which is where we are going in terms of sms. >> i think a majority so far

north so those that are applying to be here know what's going on but basically are the pilots associations and stakeholders in the sms? >> they are clearly stakeholders in just don't know the specific answer to the risk assessment. i can ask that question when i get back home. >> we have time for one more question, sir. >> enabled consulting firm in new york city this question is for you, too. i apologize. >> it happens to me all the time. >> i've been sitting here listening to this wonderful panel some of the questions that i've heard raised the issue in my head that i would like to ask you about if you don't mind while alpa is doing a stellar

job of promoting both security and the culture, promoting safety and the culture of the safety, there is a perception butter it is real or perceived that they are becoming more and more a political entity resulting in poor communications between the faa and the private sector. would the improve the reputation as a natural entity that is concerned and keeping the flight and passenger's seat? with >> i'm not sure i would agree that there is the alternate perception that what i can tell you and i think the folks here will attend, faa is deeply involved and working very closely with all the stakeholders on how we can continually enhance and improve safety some things like the commercial aviation safety can and safety and sharing initiatives, all of those are part and parcel to the faa accomplishing its mission. so i think our safety record really demonstrates that we have

worked well in consultation with the rest of the industry domestically and internationally and i not sure i share your sense that they are not feeling that in a constructive way in terms of enhancing safety within the industry. >> i just want to say it was not an accusation of is just to perception the house had perceived of people. >> sometimes there factually accurate and then you need to address that and sometimes it is inaccurate and you have to be able to educate people the facts are. but again, i haven't actually heard the prescription described as you just described it, and i think it is one way to look at the fact essay is very closely involved with its stakeholders working to enhance safety to speak for themselves. >> i think we will cut it there.

as you can see, the regulator's perspective does frame a lot of the work we do. a lot of the work from icao. it trains what we do and our safety work. join me in a round of applause and thinking our panelists. [applause] we've got great news. it's time for lunch. please trends in the jefferson ballroom with the alpa sponsored exhibits and our thanks to regional airline association and all wonderful sponsors. we will be back in this room at 1:30. enjoy your lunch and please, don't be late. thank you. the air line pilots association is holding of this forum today on air safety.

when they resume at 1:30 eastern there will be a discussion on safety issues at airports officials with faa come air-traffic controllers, pilots and operators will be part of the discussion. later today, health issues affecting pilots. again, coverage will continue at 1:40 eastern. [inaudible conersations] n]

while the airline pilots association safety for mistaking it for lunch we will show you comments from this morning but transportation security administration administrator john pistole also and answered questions from pilots begins with introductions. >> ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming the airline pilots association aviation safety chair, captain chuck

hogeman. [applause] air safety for rum. our team for this year's forum is everything matters. what does it mean for us. just this in a system as complex as commercial aviation, no single element can enhance the safety of its own. equipment systems and human factors are interrelated and affect everything else coming and we must work together to function effectively just as a crew must work together. everything matters. for the next two days we will get some of those interrelationships and why the matter to this association and the industry at large. we have informative and thought-provoking panels that will look at such issues as the political environment in the u.s., canada and worldwide. today's regulatory structures of to the task of providing saf,

efficient travel in today's economic environment. we will be talking about airport wild life, operations and runway incidents to see how we can make that airport in fairness favor. many think of flying in terms of cruising a 35,000 feet. but we know better. experience tells us some of our most challenging work takes place while we are still close on the ground or to it. we will be asking whether passengers and crew member screenings and airline security measures are up to keeping the task of keeping bad people off our airplanes. we will discuss all issues that are focused on the crew members who operate in a unique and demanding environment at high altitudes. no discussion on health and welfare how pilots would be complete without a discussion on fatigue and help all airlines, passenger and cargo alike must adapt to the same science based approach and scheduling air pilots to promote a were never

ending goal of one level of safety. as with many alpa forums in the past or will examine the role of technology and automation and the aircraft and how to keep pilots manual flying skills sharp and we will explore the rapidly growing and unmanned aerial systems where we may share our airspace with aircraft pilots on the ground. and today's air safety efforts require careful examination of pilots, health, fatigue, airports, automation and security. in short, everything matters. sitting around you and represented before your some of the world's leading experts on the subject of air safety. take the opportunity to network with other attendees. ask questions of the panelists and visit the great exhibitors and sponsors. as i often tell my passengers, buckle up your seat belts but unlike my regular passengers coming your right is for the next two days. to begin this meeting we will

honor the united states and canada with a national anthem of our two great countries. please rise for the playing of canada and the star spangled banner. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ thank you. please be seated. it's now my pleasure to introduce the president of the airline pilots association, captain lee.

>> think space and chuck hogeman, ladies and gentlemen on behalf of the 53,000 members of the airline pilots association international, welcome to the 58 years 84 -- a year safety forum. i would like for the streams for a special video presentation. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ [applause]

for those of us who are professional pilots, everything matters. when it comes to the safe transportation of our passengers and cargo that includes what their conditions, load factors, the condition of the aircraft, flight schedules and so much more. for the air line pilots association international, everything matters when it comes to advancing aviation safety. for alpa it's not just the job it is a moral imperative. the alpa pilots and staff work for our air safety organizations ct secure areas and with the of the alpa committee's related to those areas, are dedicated to carrying out this mission. and as you saw in this video, our association is involved in every facet of aviation safety.

the international air transport association recently reported that last year's accident rate was the lowest in aviation history. according to ayota was the equivalent of one accident every 2.7 million flights. this represents 39%, to 39% drop compared to 2010. in the previous mark was set. i am proud to say that in the past year we have accomplished a great deal in the areas of safety, in the areas of security and assistance and now i would like to highlight some of our most significant achievements. we will start with a crew member which is an enhanced and i stress enhanced screening

process for u.s. air pilots and flight attendants. the success of the initiative which is due in large part to the coordination of airlines from the government and alpa can be measured in the following statistics. more than 3,500 screenings take place each day utilizing the program no crew member has facilitated more than 500,000 piatt increase through securities since august, 2011, when e program was launched. known crewmember sites are now operational at 18 u.s. airports with 31 total imports expected by the end of the year. flight crew members at 28 u.s. airlines now have access to this enhanced screening process. another issue at the top of alpa's agenda in both the united

states and canada is pilot fatigue. for decades we have advocated for updated science based pilot fatigue rules. as a result, i am pleased to report that new regulations for pilot flight and duty rest requirements in the united states were released in december far 117 will implement much-needed and away to safety improvements over the next two years. but as you know, the rule excludes all cargo and lance for mandatory compliance at this is absolutely unacceptable. so alpa has redouble our efforts to promote one level of safety for all, and i repeat all airline operations. to that end, alpa has launched an intensive campaign focused on

the importance of protecting all airline pilots equally against fatigue and today the pile that advocates and staff have made as much as 400 visits to congressional offices as part of this effort. in addition to our members of sent more than 2,600 messages to their elected representatives in strong support of the safe skies act of 2012. this legislation was introduced with bipartisan support in both the houses of congress earlier this year. one loveless seeking by ensuring that all pilots are protected by science based riss requirements regardless of whether they fly passengers or cargo. if enacted the bill would direct the u.s. department of transportation to apply the federal aviation

administration's new regulations to all cargo operations in the same way they currently apply to passenger operations. the bishops and senators barbara boxer and olympia snowe for their commitment to aviation safety and leadership in introducing and moving this important legislation forward. of in canada the transport canada fatigue management working group completed its work late last year. the group which is cochaired by alpa cannot afford president captain dannel was charged with evaluating current canadian flight to e times rules and developing recommendations for change. a. since 2010 they met on a monthly basis until the final

meeting in december 2011. the co-chairs have submitted their report using the working group's recommendations and would be on the agenda at the c.a.r.e. technical committee meeting scheduled for this october. then, transport canada will take the report along with public comments and review them for the regulatory consideration. now you have my word the airline pilots association international is and will continue to be fully engaged for all types of flight operations across the airline industry in the u.s. and canada. the success of programs like the known crewmember underscores the effectiveness of utilizing the risk-based approach to aviation safety and security. alpa continues to advocate for adoption of this approach because it will enhance aviation

security making air transportation more customer friendly for the airline transportation for passengers and air cargo shippers and insure the industry continues to fuel the nation's economy and provide jobs. in the u.s. alpa has worked with the faa over the years to promote the highest levels of safety air transportation system. many of our efforts have been tied to the finding of the agency and i am happy to report that this year we finally have a long-term reauthorization bill through 2015. this bill was signed into law after 23 extensions. it advances many of the speech of priorities in putting advancing nextgen initiatives and enhancing one way safety.

making laser attacks on an aircraft a federal crime. improving the safety of lithium battery shipments by air, strengthening voluntary ev agencies the data protections studying the feasibility of installing flight deck doors or alternatives on all cargo aircraft and supporting critical aviation safety research. at the air line pilots association, we find that when we work together we achieve our outstanding results and alpa, we are uniquely positioned to bring industry stakeholders together to keep focused on issues critical important to the aviation safety mission using the 64 as a model we have telly series of highly successful conferences and to one specific

issue. last october alpa and airlines for america co-sponsored a conference on the growing problem of the laser illumination of aircraft cockpits. in january we kicked off the new year by organizing and posting a symposium on aviation safety action programs. the current challenges, the trends in these vitally important voluntary safety reporting programs. in march, it seized the opportunity to galvanize industry efforts to combat pilot fatigue. we held a landmark conference for participants to explore the actions necessary to build on these new safety regulations closing the gaps in the air cargo safety and security and

last month's alpa hosted a conference on pilot training which was sponsored by rockwell collins and general electric. each of these conferences drew a wide range of attendees from safety and security representatives and their peers and their labor groups to legislators to the representatives of several u.s. canadian and european government agencies and airline managements law enforcement and military officers, news reporters and academics the level of interest in these issues underscores the point that when it comes to aviation safety, we are all stakeholders. there are a few initiatives i would like to highlight. in april, alpa submitted comments to the faa outlining

the view on the agency's proposed rulemaking on pilot certification and qualification requirements for the air carrier operations alpa participated on the aviation rulemaking committee that developed many of the recommendations contained. in june of the house subcommittee approved funding for the human intervention motivation study. this is a highly successful collaboration between the faa air carriers and pilot representatives so while we are talking about the facts and figures come here is an important one. the long-term success rate under the program is 85 to 90%, and by approving funding the committee enabled this critical health program for professional air

line pilots to continue to operate for another three-year cycle. also in june we created the special alpa's president's committee for remote operations. chaired by first aircraft in peter black several alpa carriers conduct this type operation with the pilots routinely flying in the high arctic and other remote locations in the far northern areas of canada and the united states. earlier this year we had the opportunity to see some of these pilots inaction. the true professionals in everything they do. they operate in a harsh unpredictable environment using unpaid one ways, making a purchase with basic composition. through the creation of the committee is another step towards the longstanding goal of one level of safety and security

for airline operations. the primary focus would be to address the challenges that the professional aviator's overcome on a daily basis during operations in th arctic and similar regions. as you can see in the years since we last came together, we have accomplished a great deal. but there's always more to do come in the work of alpa's dear securitizations continues on many different fronts, and i'd like to highlight some of the association's strategic priorities going forward. one of our goals is to improve the safety and standards for the carriage of dangerous goods, especially the carriage of lithium batteries. our position is clear. lithium batteries represent an unmitigated hazard on our cargo and passenger aircraf