for the sakes those lot, let me reading. must do it openly and lovely. i have honestly worked against violence attention, there is a type of constructive nonviolent attention that is necessary for growth. i haven't yet in engaged in the -- according to the time table of those who have not suffered at duty. for years now, i have heard the word wait. it's almost always met never. the african-american has many pent up frustration. he has to get them out. let him march and have the prayer meeting at the city hall. understand why he must have sit in and freedom right. if the motions do not come out in the nonviolent wait they will

come out in a violent ways. it is a fact of history. like king, ghandi had many white friends, british and american, who sympathized with the independent movement. they liked that he was nonviolent. but each time began i did felt he had launch a new struggle against the british order or british law, the friends were filled with misgivings. the reply to such friends was two-fold. he argued it was unjust. secondly, nonviolence struggle was the only way to prevent a violent struggle a uncontrollable violent struggle. my guess is today ghandi would whole heartly welcome the nonviolent struggle. and that he would see this nonviolent struggle for the

palestinian rights as the west way of preventing the spiral of attacks and counter attack. to ghandi the onset of violence -- [inaudible] was but in the at alternative nonviolent way of fights. the in 1920, a man he befriended even as ghandi was about to leave in an open fight against the british laws. you must be aware that there was a time when the boldest -- among the favored violence, the school of ghandi is taking care of an influential grouch group of extremist activities. could have prevented a violent eruption if the people had not had presented to them a formal direct, nonviolent action.

a great fight thereafter and -- [inaudible] tried for the affection against the emperor who is what ghandi said in open court in march. [inaudible] administrator much less cannot have nidis affection i hold tb to be a virtual to what the government which in the totality has done more harm to indian than any previous system. i don't ask for clemency. i'm here to [inaudible] upon for me crime and what appears to me to be the highest beauty of the citizens. so intimate and direct connection between reconciliation and dignity is my first point. my second points relate to the theme of -- the reconciliation.

no team is more urgent yet we will do not justice to it if you forget the world outside of are there. just as there's no reck reconciliation when honor is missing, may be impossible the world is absent from our talks. a meeting in the center named after someone where the center is yet to be properly establish in a building but it is here in spirit. meeting in center named after someone who had rejected the idea of having a center for african-american studies named after him insisting he was -- america in and the world. not only are places like iran, palestinian, afghanistan, syria almosts elements in the political campaign in america, not to mention china or immigration or the european economy, not only is american in

a thousand different ways leading the rest of the world, what is america if no the world itself in a hope-giving form. [inaudible] there it will help create a new world. and the old world continues to recreate america even as america continues to reshape the world as a whole. this continue recreation hold to the migration of people in the goods and perhaps more to the fast and furious traffic of images and voices. an idea to -- device billions universal and millions empowered. then the hand held cell phone takes place of the phone, computer, tv all rolled into one. no nation has done more than america to bring this ongoing revolution into the the daily lives of hundreds of millions. it has reduced the space between americans and nonamericans.

the atlantic and the pacific are barriers no more. it is possible to go ahead any longer with the american experiment conducted in a field on 45 island nation. let us look at the two dominant realities. china and the world of islam. the regularly touch the lives of millions of americans, hopes, fear et. cetera. u.s. political debates -- one of the oldest cliches in political science is that -- [inaudible] friendships for that an tip an tip think is more than sympathy. the fear is the playing on hope. more than that america has been able to challenge and not only disprove the thesis. you possess abundant space the

blessings of wisdom, your fore banners did not always need to advance politically but pointing out to neighbors how unscrupulous brothers, uncles or how bad the religious is or untrust worthy that neighboring tribe was. in many acrowded country, this nearingivity has been the formula for success. political hopefuls look for the most rewarding enemy. one that will drive a variety of ethnic groups into a winning alliances. then they ask themselves which is more likely to work an anti-- alliance of low cost hindus or in the antimuslim alliance of all hindu. calculations of this kind of trouble in all countries with diverse populations in the history of -- [inaudible] we know that the u.s. industry

has possessed frequent appeal to racism the political energy and preferred political outcomes. yet american history is also seen a great many political contests where someone race, religion, or ethnicity was not attacked which would suggest that the american people general speaking do not take kindly to insinuation against an entire category of people. yet how sure are we about such a conclusion today? when it seems that political points can be gained by provoking fears and -- with china or the world of islam. let me add to the expression the muslim world is hardly sates factually -- speak of the world of islam. to return to america within if

insinuating that president obama is a muslim, or not tough enough against muslim countries or china, seen as an effective way of hurting the re-election prospects then reject the prop suggestion that some categories of human beings are -- [inaudible] are more dangerous than other categories. muslims are different ease necessities from americans for a long time. many muslims from a africa brought here by -- as slaves. it was [inaudible] specific terms ben franklin and thomas jefferson. they serve in armed forces in significant numbers and prarp in american life in other ways. 9/11 changed the climate. credittics charged that muslim voices not loud enough or frequent enough in denouncing terrorism and extremism. muslims relied they were not

aired or recognize and added the discriminate of muslim. it was hard to hear about how -- [inaudible] responded to the challenge of 9/11. both here in the united states. yet i've also heard muslim and immigrants say they feel freer and more comfortable about their faith in america than most countries of europe. today, thankfully, interfaith law takes place in a number of american cities. there's room for more dialogue internationally between americans and arabs, turks, indonesia begans, nigerian, sudanese. other countries containing a large muslim population. for in most cases, immigrants cherish their links with their country of origin and long to

have a relationship of mutual respect with the u.s. in my view, it is likely in the long run to give to an easy relationship between america and the world of islam improve to benefit both sides. from the -- autobiography of malcom x we learned that the -- [inaudible] helped heal occupy his heart. ic some of you may remember that. their interaction in the free air with people of different ease niceties and beliefs give muslims from the middle east, africa, inspiration and ideas to strengthen america's ties with their country of or jen. if we look around we will find something like this is already happening with muslims in the different communities with muslims in the united states. let us talk the future of islam from the headlines of violent

incident or the extremist rhetoric. that rhetoric is being challenged with bravery or in the muslim world today. openly by some. one day -- persons will command the megaphones in the world islam and all of us will hear the words of reconciliation that are uttered at great risk today. the megaphone has been used in the country -- [inaudible] during the recent primary contest with the republican nomination it was hard at times to hear language degrading mu.s for their faith. i get a kick out of foughts who call -- in it was said by a president hopeful in south carolina. he wanted to equality and ask where do you think the concept

of equality comes from? answering his own question, the candidate said it doesn't come from islam, the east or eastern religions. it comes from the guard of abraham, jacob that's where it comes from [laughter] i don't think that candidate would have lost much had he just spoken last sentence animated the two proceeding ones. it is a pity he chose to put down islam and the eastern religions. in much world including several part of the u.s. muslim and nonmuslim live as close neighbors. in some cases as good friends. most likely as cooperating citizens. that does not con condemn them to live in perpetual state of fear. as people move out or in, the demographic makes other i changes. they may change differently in different part of the same country. more over, the local dynamics

may vary from a national dynamic. in other case, the dynamic gets 0 complicated than the two party lead which is almost always the case. of course, this is true of today's american. but it was also true of india and ghandi was struggling for india's independents. now this is somewhat harrowing story. i-- bear with it. in ghandi's struggle we find an attempt to reconcile the indian and the british and the untouchables. there was a colleague of his members of the crucial team he was leading with one another each possibly the most point yent attempt at all. ghandi had the work cut out. indian militants reconciliation between indian and the british. remembering the century of

muslim that proceeded british rule and hindu numbers many hindus wanted to rule over muslims not share power with them. on the other hand some muslims felt that the end of british rule should mean a return to muslim rule. hindus were shocked by the equality with the untouchables. radical intouchables wants a separate world not a common world for the better educated hin disiews were likely to dominate. as for ghandi close and crucial team of indian leaders they were divided by human rivalry or ideology internationalist and modernist conservative and approachial. the fight on -- [inaudible] one for india's freedom another for hindu-muslim freedoms. now thanks to the commitment of great many indians, and to ghandi's own leadership skills,

including on when and whether to fight. independents was won and reconciliation was achieved not for all time. but to a large in fact a astonishing degree. ghandi's sadness muslim majority parts of indian became a separate country called pakistan. the rest of india that became free was not a hindu -- equality was assured to those and punishment discriminating against anymore. india's reality know don't confirm to the constitutional guarantees. we should recognize those and the efforts of citizens and many leaders to secure them on the ground. at the end of 1947 a few months as they merged as independent

nations, a question of justice was raised. holding in the treasury more than $100 million in 1947. required to send that money to the neighboring country, pakistan, indian announced the prime minister and deputy prime minister that the money will not be sent because the conflict had just started. ghandi was -- at the time was not a member of the was dopily troubled. at this time he was trying to address grave wounds the killings of previously in august, and september of '47. killings in pakistan and india. the equal number of muslim and nonmuslim lives were taken. the nonmuslim were hindu. by december of 1947 many mosques had been taken over. and in an attempt was being made to push the muslims out of the

city. ghandi's response to the happenings and to the decision of the indian government to with hold the transfer of pakistan's money was to in january 1948 for reconciliation. as a result hundreds of thousand of hindus and muslims took part in a peace of reconciliation and urged ghandi to brought the thought. they did not like his views, but they liked him. they asked ghandi what can the government of india do enable to you to end the fight. release pakistan's money said ghandi. the money was released, not happily but it was rammingsed. occupied mosque were -- the plan to make it a solely indue city was abandoned. it was a solid plan. it was abandoned. on january 18, 1948, ghandi

broke the fast and peace returned. twelve days later he was assassinated. he was mourned by both people of pakistan and india. oregon ghandi for justice and reconciliation may be pertinent. on the battle front the antagonist was the leader of the untouchables, he was a dr. 22 years younger than ghandi a gifted lawyer fought passionately for rights after obtaining a degree from columbia. he saw the british as allies and the hindu -- [inaudible] in the 1940s the british appointed the executive counsel. charging ghandi was born into a high class family did not confront the hindu system hard enough or directly enough.

he would give up hinduism someday in the future and asked for untouchable rights to be entreched for british departure. [inaudible] he was political colleagues as urged him to focus solely on india independents and put the question of untouchability on hold. thanks to michigan day's campaign the bulk of hindu in india acknowledged untouchability as a great sin. the dynamics were tough for ghandi. for he needed the hindu for independents and the immunity. it neither his country or political realities would allow him to put the question on the bask burner. in the event he successfully -- the indian national congress, the organization working for i want dependents and intouchable

rights demanding independents. -- to invite them to india's first cabinet. this shocked indian national congress. a member of the counsel of british -- [inaudible] to become minister of law in india's previous cabinet they agreed. as the prime minister of the untouchable shared the and became the leading architect of the indian constitution. with lyrical justice, history was made, and astonishing reconciliation between was achieved. in january 1948, ghandi was killed. not before becoming a buddhist

fulfilling the earlier pledge to give up hinduism. some resisted are an influential force in india's politics today. in times they revisit the past and find fault with ghandi's position. it is an unult ralt -- hindus, muslims, christian arch buddist untouchables high low cost, and middle class give to india in a name of all the people the constitution that assures unqualified equality for all. only 18 years younger than his father for years a hero to his younger brother, my uncle was one of the first fellow fighters for michigan michigan d.a. in south africa. battled for the rights of indians living there.

nonviolent to justice that was the -- [inaudible] but at the age of 23 he walked out of the family home in johanns burg. we never know what it was that pushed him in 1911. was it the rig roar of prison life in south africa? was the father-son policy that his son should not be favored? was the father's embrace after a simple life of lawyers of prosperity as a lawyer or simply a longing to be free and just himself? ghandi found it hard to be the ideal father and husband while waging the numerous battles and managing growing team. during the south africa years he gave much time to his son meeting face to face or writing long letters to him. he perhaps advised him more than he could tell. the -- was independent and do as he wish as the father would say

or write. the father wants him to do was spelled out. he enjoyed the publicity he he he rewhenever he received. he was drunk and created a scene when he was required to see his dying father and mother. a charming and gift giving uncle who arrived without notice and left with equal abruptness. the father of the nation frequently found himself being rejected by the eldest son. the vict -- he was helpless. praise should showered by the whole world could not wash away. he died six months after his father's asash assassination. the journalist he met seemed to

doubt it was the youngest son. i see the pain between the four and my son. my father, my grandfather, and my uncle in order to remind all of us that reconciliation will have to include reconciliation in the family. i'm certain that not a soul here is uneffected by the bain of separated and suffering families on or incars -- incarcerated. for reconciliation to happen in the family or nation, spojt to place blame, and readiness to understand we must become more important that the understood. you should try as ghandi tried. now as a national another country who spent several years

in america. i have been struck by the american dream to set goals work hard, you will get there. in other parts of the world, a dream is a fancy, the power of the american dream is that often, though not all day, it is reality. january on occasion become a college president and so forth. out of about 200 countries in the world, only one has an image of this kind. this is one reason are long. with an migration has gone on for centuries and with people moving within america, some industries -- [inaudible] the idea of genes within america and the rest of the world, america constantly renews itself. let me confess, when i visited america for the first time in 1957 and saw some of the cities, i did not imagine that a black

man would one day occupy the white house. some of you may have imagined it at that time. because most of you were not around that time. i did not. however, to my great good luck in the summer of 1957, i did meet dr. martin luther king jr. in washington, d.c., he was only 29, and i was 21. visiting the u.s. again in 1960, i observed the suspense in the president issue election on a cold and windy january morning in washington, d.c. i witnessed john f kennedy's gnawing really a for if the first time a ron man catholic become a president. 48 years later a african-american made it. defeat the two events -- [inaudible] to answer the question as why americans had, quote, prospered and no other -- [inaudible] his answer was, quote, here we unleash the energy of individual

genius to the extent that has ever been done before. president region added america requires, quote, willingness to believe in ourselves and believe in our capacity to perform eat deeds. after all, he added why shouldn't we believe that? we are americans. why shouldn't we believe that we are americans. supreme element in the american dream. so unleashing is the energy and creativity of the individual endowed by her or his creatorrer of unail alien able rights. underskort society or the nation or the individual is a part. thus the preamble to the constitution. six goals that shape the design of the sphwhiewtion. each goal is applying to a people live together rather than an individual. it a more perfect union, justice, domestic peace,

security, general welfare, the blessings of liberty. in the ivy a dream speech, dr. king high lighted the greatness of americans of individual but rather the failure of the nation as whole to honor the promissory note of equality sign in the declaration of independents. he also had high standards for those 0 fighting for equality. in the process the rights must not be guilty of wrongful. let's not seek to satisfy a quest of freedom from drinking from the cup of hatred. we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical source with soul force. the pursuit of the happiness, the defeat of poverty is central to the american dream. yet as we know, dr. king also spoke i have a dream off the power of undeserved suffered. therefore by he deep end the concept of the american dream.

like america itself the dream continues to evolve. visiting the new memorial in washington, d.c., a few weeks back. he opposed the varm war. the next president obama announced new steps to support honor veteran of the war. dissent in possible in the america and so reconciliation. let me recall lines from president obama's gnawing -- served in local restaurant can stand before you to take a sacred oath, president obama. that it is a strength not a weakness. we a nation of chris chn, muslims, jews and hin -- hindus. we are shaped by every language. because we have tasted the bitter taste of civil war. we can't help but believe the

old hatred from the past that the lines of shall dissolve. common humidity -- [inaudible] a new era of peace. these powerful words apply to reconciliation to america in the world. i can easily end with them. before i finish, i must share any difficulties with the expression of the american dream. one difficulty what said was about china and the world of islam. both china and the muslim world need major changes. uneasy cost when a dream appears to require enemies. the part of the americans should not need the reinforce of the chinese and the muslims. i'm troubled to -- of the great american vir you focus to push aside another asset memory.

concentrated on eliminating current threat, americans seem willing at times to forget earlier history. yet if the past is not clearly faced and eliminated threat may rush in the future. a focus on iran in present is -- [inaudible] but the question is to why america supported an antidemocratic in the 1950s we need -- [inaudible] lessons may have to be drawn from the history of the 1980s when support was given to saddam hussein during the iraq war. some the participants -- parents of al qaeda. the u.s. war and is always right right when installing -- and not a position govern -- guaranteed to produce good policy for the future. also concerning to me is also entertaining at the same time is the proposal made by another

presidential candidate. on april 13 in st. louis international gun rights movement, quote, the right to bear arms come from the creator not the government, unquote. the candidate said. [laughter] the nra, he said, had been too -- [inaudible] for the agenda beyond american borders. his presidency, quote, will submit to the u.n. treaty that extends the bear arms to every person. [laughter] every world citizens deserved the right defend themselves. the candidate is standing ovation from the crowd of roughly 5,000nra members or supporters. now if a few billion rifles would no doubt bring a modest profit to gun makers. it might also shrink the world's population. i know, that the proposal that the candidate suddenly aspired to offer was not taken seriously

by most americans perhaps not the candidate himself. i refer to it bring up my final point. the power of symbol, which as the real reconciliation touches. the center fully recognitions. now among the symbol that americans cherish the -- gun, the flag and the cross. i'm not american national your flag i'm referring to the stars and stripes. not the other flags. your flags scares me. the flag held up by exhausted yet victorious shoulders can risk deep motions include one's pride in the country, trust, the reward of endurance and bravery and satisfaction of crimes. like my grandfather, i cry nonviolence and weary of military weapons. i acknowledge the gun has often

saved the innocent, the trapped, and the enslaved. though i'm a hindu, the cross speaks to truth to me of unmerited unnecessary suffering pcht sign from the meek to the superiority to what god needs over what i want. i'm troubled, however, in our detection in some americans that the cross, the flag, and the gun are but three different forms of the same sacred object. in america one wanting the citizens reconciled with one another and the people of the world will need to remember the difference between the gun and the flag and between the flag and the cross. the gun has the place, but not as high as that of fearless heart a forgiving heart or a caring heart. amazing as america is, it is not the world and wonderful as americans are, they do not

institute all of humidity which in the eyes of many the cross representsnd addresses. now the cross, of course, is a religious idol. symbol but america has other wonderful expressions too. it has the statute of liberty, the declaration of independents, the gettysburg address, the i have a dream speech, and so much more. to make the world feel, make the world feel closer to america. above all, america contains and offers how humanitarian itself. humanitarian constantly renewed. allow me to end by offering my respect here in tulsa, oklahoma to the effects the record their people -- extraordinary people of an extraordinary country. [applause]

tonight on the companion networking a look at the mood of the american lek rate. we hear from neil new how's and peter heart. one of the questions peter hart asked voters who would you rather go to a ball came with. president obama or mitt romney? >> a lot of focus groups, and i care about focus groups because i think it is a great way of getting underneath what people are thinking. and one of the questions that i love to ask people is something that relates to their life in a personal way. i said, let us take these three candidates. let's suppose they were in the fifth grade. what do you think they would have been like as fifth graders? and i put up various types of people, push the next button,

please. and i had the nerd, the respected, the rich privileged kid, the hard worker, the loan -- loner, the teacher pet, the bully, the star athletes, the know it all. i said who do you think gingrich would be? push the button. know it all. who do you think mitt romney would be? rich privileged kid. how did obama come out? star athlete or the teacher's pet. and, you say well, these are just cute. but they tell you a lot about where people are coming from. in fact i asked a couple of weeks ago, i said to them a dufnlings people, i said let's suppose you could go to the ball game with either barack obama or mitt romney. nine of the twelve raised their hand and said i want to go with barack obama.

he would be fun, easy, he'd know about baseball. we could talk back and forth. three people raised their hand and said i want to go with mitt romney. i said why mitt romney? he's got the limo, he'll buy the beer, the dogs, the soda. >> you can see this entire event peter heart and republican neil at 8:00 p.m. eerp on c-span. the airline pilot association held a forum this week on airplane safety. in one panel discussion from the gathering, the federal aviation administration top medical official spoke about health issues facing pilots. [inaudible conversations] okay.

welcome back. some people have a luxury of being able to take good health for granted. the airline pilots we do not. the faa makes us undergo medical examinations on a regular basis. while many medical issues don't have much effect on the personal's ability to be productive in the the f for a pilot the same thing can end a career. we operate in a extreme environment with high altitudes. we fly day and night and have widely various sleep patterns. and don't forget stress. stress with flight operation, family concerns or the economic fortunates much our particular airline. it can all add to a major impact on a pilot's health and well being. we'll hear from a distinguished group of aviation and medical experts. moderating this panel is con air

captain chip who is l at alpa's air medical chair. >> thanks. [applause] >> good, ladies and gentlemen. i'm captain chip. airline pilot association chairman of the national group. the group makes up one of the five components of alpa's pilot assistance structure. in the group, we take a multifaceted approach to helping members maintain good health with information and individual interactions. our group works with the medical industry and federal regular lay stores ensure the latest information and standards not only get to the pilot, but they receive the information but also applied to the medical certificate. now on to the panel. i'm honored to have such

distinguished guest today. dr. ?ieder is the adviser and dr. fred is the faa federal air surgeon. following their presentation will will be ample time for questions and i encourage you to engage and make your way to the microphones with your questions. dr. ?ieder is the president and ceo of the aviation medicalled a rise i are service. we also refer to it as amass. they have a critical ongoing relationship that started in the late '60s. every airline pilot must pass a regular medical dpoomtion examination to determine the health. it is invaluable not only in helping pilots maintain their medical certificate, but in helping pilots regain their

medical certificate with the least amount of hassle and a reasonable amount of time if it were ever to be denied. they also provide proactive information and assistance that ensures pilot's maintain the best possible health throughout their airline career. dr. snider i'd like you to talk about the scope of your corporation and how amass supports alpa. >> thank you, chip. it is a pleasure to be here. the alpa air medical officer was formed in den denver in 1969, since that time we have been providing service for alpa, the member within and the leadership. we also been interacting with the faa, and with international organizations the military in the ntsb with a goal of promoting pilot health, and pilot safety. we have two primary functions

that we work with. one is the consultation which is advise to the union leadership, on issues such as what you'll find out in the white papers that have been distributed in the back room. please pick one up and take look as they cover important issues. the other parent of the services are to the individual pilots. we assist them with maintaining their health, providing them advice about how to best do that while simultaneously helping them maintain their medical certify and be compliebt with the faa rules for reporting medical con decisions. we work closely with the pilot assistance committee which captain eluded to has five component, the air medical and we work with the hymns. which captain spoke about earlier today a program where

pilots with a disease of addiction or abuse are successfully treated and returned to the cockpit in very, very successful program. we work closely with a professional standards and critical incident response teams from alpa with pilots who may have problems in different areas, and many times we find overlap from all of those areas. the canadians also work closely with us although they have an ton my and different regulations that apply to them, the common theme of health and safety is universal for all pilots. we also spend a considerable amount of time interacting with the office of geeing and safety department. to take a look at areas where pilot's health might be improved through broad areas with suggested changes in technology and regulations. our other interactions include the legal department and

retirement ?owrns make sure that pilots are encouraged to get the appropriate medical care and have the ability to do so. a big part of the effort also working with jointly with the the communication department. we write monthly articles to inform pilots about evolving technology, current medical con decisions, and how best to care for themselves. we also produce some short segments for tv, captain bruce -- produces the air medical flier and the information handout that guys -- goes out to all pilots. we other ways to communicate to the pilots. we also participate in a number of conferences that premier conference being our hymns conference which is hosted in denver every year with about 300 to 350 atebt -- attend keys.

our activities -- and the certificate indication authorities. we have a relationship with the iko medical office and tony evans there and the himselfs outreach also includes educating our international brothers and sisters regarding programs to better treat the drug and alcohol problems. most recently we've been in new zealand, hong kong and brie brazil to help them set up programs. perhaps the most important is collaborating with in a host of areas. the doctor has been gracious in working with alpa as we have seen all day with the theme of cooperation between industry and regulators. we also work closely with the air medical decision in oklahoma city primarily on behalf of the individual pilots but also to

initiative and effect policy changes. some of the areas that alpa has been pushing for changing in policy that have been great successes are number one the h imf program with over 4,000 pilots being successfully returned to the cockpit. back in the '70s coronary arty disease -- to not report conditions or dangerous to their health not seek evaluation and treatment with the evolution of policy changes in that area, now pilots routinely are returned to fly after being successfully treated with these diseases. other examples would be the hiv positive pilots, in interest of the transfer and travel we do, the doctor officer worked very losely and announced policy that allow pilots to use medicines to better prepare the pilots and

make them safer what they are faced with the transher rid began flights and are facing the jet lag. a very important change in april of 2010 was a policy allowing pilots with the disease of depression to fly on certain medications. with aggressiving monitoring and testing prior to doing so. when the is a sars epidemic broke out. there was questions whether the pilots were at risk to disease. and where if they could use medication. the air service office was instrumental in allowing policy with the protection to fly with medication. it was done in a matter of several days. flight time duty time has been an ongoing discussion. i think we're making significant

progress with the medical aspect. looks primarily not only at the science but also been so well defined but also ways we might augment that. we also provide education to the pilots about oh areas that might help such as the use of nutritiousal supplements in lou -- used in the past. some of the current issues we have are the evolving technology and products in medicine. there's a continuous evolution of medication, that are comes out but also now we're looking at pacemakers that have interesting capabilities now automatic internal defibrillators. the artificial pancreas for individuals inflicted with diabetes requiring insulin. on october 1st, the faa is implementing universal web-based medical application for pilots who have been able to work

jointly to understand some potential problems that both pilot and air traffic controller might face. the long-range flights we have workedded with medications issue. the exposures the vision research department within the civil air medical substitute was instrument tal in providing us information that allow the us to educate the public at the laser has abdomen conference that alpa ohioed last year. we're interested in streamlining the certification process for the pilots there is less reluctance to report conditions to the faa, once they are medical sound they can also be certified. in the very, very near future, i think we will be wrestling with commercial space flight medical standards not only for the crews but possibly for the passengers as women.

i earlier mentioned the alpa white papers. i would encourage you to pick up a copy in the back near our sponsors. one of the importants in enhancing the safety and health protection which encourages an aviation health and safety program with the faa, with industry,. there is another white paper on unmanned aircraft systems. the medical certification of the operation of the system will be a key issue for discussion in the near future. we're very, very fortunate to have dr. fred tillton with the federal air surgeon speaking with us today. after graduating from air force academy, i'm sorry west point. i'm an air force guy. [laughter] he did come to the bright side and joined the air force. [laughter]

and had 4,000 hours as a command pilot and as senior flight surgeon in a host of aircraft including the b. 47, c141, trainers, t37. transportation aircraft graduate of the university of new mexico with the master science and m.d. and has master of public health from the university of texas and after retiring from the air force, he had a career as the regional medical department for boeing. he took the initial position with the faa deputy federal air surgeon he's been the federal air surgeon and currently flying the citation x l for the faa. dr. tillton is a friend, a colleague, and he is a pilot's doctor or a doctor's pilot. he understands aviation. he's an advocate for the pilot

and it's a great privilege to have him speaking with us today. thank you. [applause] >> hello, perch. i usually tell people when i get it proves i'm really old. so '02 fortunate you have the doctor work with you. we work with him every quarter he comes to washington. we spend a significant amount of time discusses policy and we look at individual cases. he represents you and your constituents and makes sure that if we're having problems with certifying individuals they get the best shot. so he does an outstanding job for you. you're fortunately. i'm going take a couple of minutes to give remarks because i want to give you most of your time to ask questions. but the first thing i want to talk about is a certification policy that we have with the faa. as you heard on the pilot before

i was a drp i used to tremble a lot when i used to see my flight surgeon thinking the best thing i can do is break even if i get in and out and didn't do anything it was a good thing. i felt that way when i flew b57 and the scrod rones were assigned to us. they flew with us went tdy with us. they went to the club with us. i learned that the best flight surgeons are the people who integrate with the pilots, work closely with them, party with them, social lose with them and realize that flying is extremely important and i always tell beam that a flight surgeon can makea big mistake if he unnecessarily disqualifies somebody. it leads to the certification policy as you know i work in abs savuation safety. i work for peggy who spoke to you earlier today and the

primary reason we're there is for safety of the air space. so i tell everyone that i work with, the reason we're here is to make sure at air space is safe and i go to seminars and talk about to them about the reason they're there is do to same thing. you probably see the ane probably more than you see any other faa person and so the ame has a great opportunity to talk to you about your history, and the make sure that you are safe and to learn new things that we're finding out in air are space medicine. if you take for granted the primary reason is for aviation safety. the second reason we're there is make sure everyone we can get in the air we do. and if you look at our history over the faa over the years, fort years had if you had hyper tension like i do and a lot of other things, you were disqualified not just for a month or year. forever. we have gone a long way. if you look at the list of things we for certify now.

forty years ago they would never have done that. we do it on evidence-based medicine. our primary mission is to get them in the air. our data shows that. we denied less than 400 people finally last year the dates are a little bit skewed. those are the people that pursued it to the end. we deny very few people because of our primary policy if i is certify everyone with we can and get them in the air. the second thing i want to talk about is the pilot bill of rights. you may or may not be aware of it. it was pass the recently. i'm not sure nor is the rest faa exactly how it's going impact us. it will impact us we're going to have a requirement to notify pilots when they come from the medical exams they're having examination with which is according to law and investigation. so what will that mean? it also mean in this case have a right now they used to be able

to appeal beyond me to the national transportation safety board. now they can appeal in the u.s. district court. they can get a jury trial. all of these things in the several other aspects of the pilots bill of rights we're not clear how they're going to effect us. they will effect us. they will effect you. in the coming months you'll learn more about that. so be aware that it's coming and there's to come in that regard. and with those commenteds, i'd be happy to sit down and answer questions or stand up and answer questions. thanks a lot. [applause] ..

>>he company suspended the policy. a couple months ago before i left they continued once again to implement the liability policy, which is in direct conflict to our medical standard. it's a policy that really conflicts with that. i know my former airline is dealing with that policy. what are your thoughts on that and is the faa looking into the individual airlines who do have these policies? >> well, first of all, if you have issues like that, medical

probably is not the correct organization. it would be flight stand to look at the management of airline. i certainly do not think that it is a good idea for people not to be able to tell the airline they are sick. at the outset my primary reason for being it was aviation safety. and if someone is telling you, you are sick and you have to fly an airplane, it's countered to the philosophy of many reasons. i would not support such a policy, but in effect we don't make policy for the airline. they do that. so if you feel there's a conflict with your airline, they are causing a safety issue, you should report it probably to flight standards and not medical. although they might talk to us about the consequences. [inaudible] >> good afternoon, dr. tilton.

i actually a couple questions. from your perspective, we have some emerging technologies coming our way. uas is one that was brought up on the slide, and i wonder if you could elaborate a little bit, thoughts of aeromedical issues that might be unique to uas. that's one. and then the same kind of question with ultra long haul operations, in particular i've had a couple of bouts with kicking stones and that's, i don't know if there's an airline pilot out here who hasn't had a kidney stone. i did know if there was any more information along that. i know my ame is joe, wanting to start a research project and why that is such an issue with pilots. but just those two questions about aeromedical challenges faced by perhaps uas and ultralong operations. >> well, i'll start off first of all by saying i hope there's at

least one airline pilot out there that hasn't had a kidney stone. and i don't know if there really is an increased incidence of kidney stones in pilots, but i do know that one of the reasons people have kidney stones is because they get dehydrated. and staying in an airliner for ultralight and flights that you talked about, 18 hours, even longer, if people are not hydrating themselves there's the possibility they could be dehydrated. if ever potential, that might exacerbate the problem. so i don't think anybody has done a study that says that pilots have kidney stones because of that, or that they've increased incidence of kidney stones. certainly is significant because if you have a kidney stone, those of you who have had it, will tell you it's not something you want to in an airplane. we are extremely painful and their something that we watch. certainly we have lots of people that have wavers with kicking stones, but we are concerned you might have one flight that might pass and create problems.

now i will get back to your first question, which is what are we doing about uas can what i think the aeromedical situation with respect to uas. we are actually looking to develop standards for people who operate you a as. the problem is there's only different kind of those airplanes that are fun. some of them are the size of f.o.b. and some are getting it to the size of almost the 737 or bigger. how do you deal with those individuals that operate those? some are doing them by line of sight where they're watching these and have an observant watch us and. they may be inspecting a billy budd some of them are flying on computer programs, and with all kinds of issues associated with vision, associated with doing, associated with cognitive functions of program. some of them are flying completed program and a program and takeoff and land and you don't do anything else. some of them are flying like model airplanes were actually a vigil -- visual control. and other ways you can control

these airplanes. so we are going to look at, and at the is actively trying to figure how we will develop the standard and working on rules to do that. right now we have no authority to regulate those with respect to medical conditions. but i think eventually, and adobe eventually needs a long time, is going to take as much or maybe a year or two to figure out how we develop a standard that cuts this whole gambit of uas were very small things to very huge things. how do we deal with it and airspace quick out of air traffic control do the way we used to manage airplanes. there's no one in the global hawk to see outside. so it's an issue for us, medicine, air traffic control, an issue for u.s. pilot but very complicated, and so i suspect that you will see in the coming months some standards associated with those people that operate them. but how we will end up completely and finally i'm not completely sure.

>> boy, i'm the last guy standing. i get to ask the big question. personal, i would like to say as recipient of a special issuance medical, thank you very much. that was a wonderful thing to get that medical back. and i'd like to congratulate you folks for the speed at which the process moves. was quite surprised. and pleasantly surprised. my question has more to do with, as we and aircraft design operations group move forward, we hear manufactures talking about constructing single pilot transport category airplanes, things like this. i just wondered what you look at in medical standards as you would consider that type of

development. this is much, way down the road type of a project. as we look at the looming potential looming pilot shortage, there's two things i see coming. one is single pilot transport airplanes, and the other is test pilots flying well past age 65. >> single pilot is an interesting issue, and actually pilots in the united states have less of an issue than a deal in the united kingdom, in europe, and even in canada. the reason i say that is we do not certify individuals that we feel may have some kind of medical problem that will create a safety problem in the air. the europeans and canadians, and i'm not sure about the rest of the countries in the world, have programs where they were certify one that is only for participation in a multi-pilot cockpit with a fully qualified copilot. we don't do that, so we certify people so that we believe that they are just as safe to fly an

airplane as someone who might not have a special issuance, or a waiver. so as a result of that from the medical perspective i don't think that having a single pilot transport airplane is as big an issue as i do think maybe from the flying public, who wonders about one pilot out there, and what happens if the person of some kind of medical problem. and as you're aware when we frequently see pilots that get incapacitated, not because they have a condition that is disqualifying, they may have a gastrointestinal problem are something that affects them temporarily where today some now they're ready to go fit and feel. yet if they been alone in the airplane, what would that have accomplished and how would that affect the safety of the airspace. i've asked her of some manufactures that were developing single cockpit airplanes and decided that the public was ready for those kinds of airplanes, and that's anecdotal. am not sure if that's true or not, but i think with respect to

question how will it affect medical, not so much in the united states. marceau in europe because of their, the way they certify people. does that answer your question? >> sure did. thank you again. >> you're welcome. >> thank you, good afternoon. my name is bob perkins. i do not have a kidney stone. [laughter] i'm air safety courtney for canada, and i'm more interested in the international certification. the idea of course we try globally harmonized as much as possible. the certification standards. through icao and ipod and other body to i'm just wondering how the faa is clapping with, -- cooperating, canada to work with the asset to work with icao on that harmonization of medical standards.

>> it used to be, in my opinion better than it is now. the reason i say that, shortly after i came to the faa as a deputy, the ja a essentially chief of standards came over and visit with us and said putting -- couldn't someone please come and help them develop their medical policy? at that time the joint aviation authorities struggle to how are they going to create their medical standards in europe so that it gets one voice so that they could then enter that to others. at committee met quarterly, maybe sometimes only three-time year but usually quarterly. i would go, i went over as the participant and i sat through those means. i learned a lot. i learned a lot about their philosophy versus our philosophy. essentially the standards in your are not that much different from the standards in the united states. the differences how they employ those standards, and so now that

the ja has gone away and now it is the legal body, managing the medical certification issues, i don't participate so much. i participate more now with icao than they do with the he also folks but they also compete in the space of is a committee set at icao that is called a medical progress to agree. we go up there and discuss standards, look at the icao standards and tried to develop a uniform icao standard which didn't hope will be deployed across the world. so rather than working directly with, i work in closer, closely with icao to develop the standard to as a of fact, related to that, you may be aware that on the 20th of july, abel was finalized that pilots have a special issuance no longer have to carry their authorization letter along with

them. and the reason we got that requirement was the 2007, icao audited us, not the medical part of icao, but the audit to the faa, and they directed actually forced us to write a rule that said if you have a waiver, you must carry your letter of authorization with you, dick cheney the reasons you have that waiver. at first they wanted us to put a directly on the medical certificate. and we said there's no way we are going to do that. so they allowed us as an accommodation to carry the authorization letter on with them. shortly thereafter, icao doctor called me and said why did you do such a dumb thing? and i said because the auditors told us we needed to do that. and we worked with him over the years, and finally got an agreement from icao that it wasn't necessary to do that, so if pilots can whether private or commercial, no longer have to carry that lever -- letter

within. the reason that such an issue is because it had privacy information on it. what the diagnosis was, et cetera. so having to show that to inspector was not necessary, we believe, because all they needed was a medical certificate saying that are medically certified to fly. so i think that's a good thing and that's one way we worked with the international folks to make flying safer and healthier and easier for you. >> thank you. >> dr. tilton, as a former volunteer now working for boeing, talking with an airline pilot about a month ago who received an e-mail i believe from your office, with your signature, about a survey about amt. i was trees. i assume your family with a. i'm curious in terms of its objective if you have the results back. are we looking to change any standards?

>> we don't have the results back yet and yes, i am aware of that. it's run out of our office in oklahoma city. they did it every two years. what they're looking at is to get a consensus of what amd's are thinking. whether issues might be, could have suggestions about how we can do our business better so not necessary changing the ame business but much more making how we can make a bit more effective. and where he can we change policies so that omega asia for them to do their job and as a consequence, easy for them to help you get certified and get your medical certificates. >> is there one particular challenge that seems to be on areas that seem to be the largest challenge for them, getting pilots recertified? >> i wouldn't say there's one particular challenge, other than what your earlier speaker said was, he was thankful that he got his clearance so quickly. we worry about that a lot, in fact we just lost the person is

run the certification division for over 15 years, who has been now replaced by another individual named courtney scott paper he and his staff look at that closely. one thing we've done to enhance our abilities, is we now expanded certification to the regions as well. so a pilot, talk to the regional medical director, so ken and ame. and hopefully that business of looking the way we do certifications, making more expeditious and enhancing our ability to do that quickly and safely is one of our primary goals. >> i know certainly your group and the resources are superb with it. have you noticed must change in the process? the impression i get is i don't know if i was a easier but just better or more clear and less ambiguous. citing somebody is doing some good things. >> i will make one of the. one of the things that we're

doing is looking at the way made we can do away with special issuances. if a person has a particular issue, which is stable, some kind of cancer, for instance, although they have had cancer, it's now in quote, secure. some kind of state was possible it could come back in 30 or 50 years. but if you're stable and we believe a person is stable and where asking for the doctor to give us a report every year and the report comes back the report comes back and so just as i told he was okay last year, why are you bugging me? there's no good reason for us to do that. there's no good reason for you to have to get that report. perhaps if you're being followed by her oncologist or a cancer doctor, he can sure do that and give it to your amy or perhaps are a unique make that decision. instead of requiring those people a special issue is, we will just issue them with a record issue is saying you have this history and to gather returns you need to let us know.

so hopefully that will again streamline the process we have for certification. >> appreciate it. thank you. >> if i may comment, there's numerous examples of the office of aerospace medicine streamline the process, reducing the requirements for observation periods or the documentation. most recently we have seen a substantial reduction in the processing time for pilots diagnosed with sleep apnea which may affect four to 6% of the u.s. population. it's very change condition, and certainly has adverse effects on aviation safety. yet the initial certification process required a series of tests that were both expensive and require a long period of, relative long period in between getting the test, getting the data and getting it to the faa. to a discouraged pilot from obtaining evaluation for a possible serious medical condition. now that the faa has shortened

the process to allow technology to take advantage of getting data quickly, the process has gone from what used to take three months and sometimes under two weeks. it works synergistically with the pilots to improve health as dr. tilton said, the safety of airspace system because pilots are encouraged to pursue these evaluations to get treatment for diseases they might have. >> i am calling wilson with mesa airlines. i have kind of a three tier question. first of all, we hear all sorts of wild accusations or claims of the amount of radiation that we are exposed to on certain stage length of flight. could you give some kind of idea of what may be the public to come and other aspects of our lives? and then kind of go into possibly if the solar flares that we're seeing so much on the

news these days is adding to that exposure? and that segues into my final part. could you discuss the interaction job with other aviation safety and health organizations, such as cdc and maybe even nasa? >> i'm not an expert on those, the first to question, but we actually unfortunately the person to use to run that organization named wally friedberg just passed away last week. he was an international recognized expert. he actually developed an algorithm to look at things like solar flares to determine whether or not an airplane should be diverted based on the proton, the probability that a proton storm might occur, cause some problem. so we agile have an algorithm we can use to look at those to see the airplanes need to be diverted. and we actually have done studies looking at certain kinds of cancer to see if they are

caused by exposure in the cockpit. there's one particular type of cancer called melanoma which there may be some relationship with. but i don't have the data, it and right now it's anecdotal. certainly if you're at altitude there's a possibility your exposed because the higher you go, the less atmosphere you protect yourself. so there's a probability to be exposed. at your protected somewhat by the cockpit windows, and there are some issues that we don't have all the answers for. i haven't seen any significant increase risk with respect to the numbers saying that a person is exposed in an airline can he or she has a much greater risk of having a particular kind of cancer. there is a relationship to melanoma, and wade may have more data on that i don't know, but i don't. i have no more dated than that. now, the last part and then i will let away answer the question if he wants to is we interact with some of the other safety organizations.

i'm on an oversight board at nasa, actually for the medical committee. so when have significant issues they will call the board together, and we need to discuss their policies, and hopefully help them develop their safety standards that they didn't implement at the faa. there are members on that from the military and from the private committee. it was a member on their from the national transportation safety board. other than that with respect in the actions with individuals, we do and i with ea a and aopa, and they in fact, i was at oshkosh a couple weeks ago and met with her medical oversight committee that helps them, and they are group of ame set up and deal with pilots that have significant medical issues to help them deal with their problems. so i frugally get calls from the chairman of their medical committee and i also get calls from gary crump who is the aopa

medical director whenever the issues to deal with us. and those individuals also interact with original flight surgeons and with the medical certification division in oklahoma city to deal with particularly difficult medical certification issues. now, if quay has a comment with respect to the cancer issue, certainly welcome. >> there are three studies on aware of. we've looked at a study from the medical university of south carolina that look at cancer deaths, and essentially pilots were a healthier cohort than the general population. there was an increase of incidents in melanoma but it wasn't clear that that was caused by radiation received in flight. it may be that pilots have easier access and more leisure time to get to warm climates where they might be exposed to the. so the cause and effect was impossible to determine. there was one study where there

was an increased incidence of a rare type of brain tumor in pilots in canada, but it lacked the power because of the low numbers to really make an association of that. then there was another study of flight attendants in scandinavia, i forget which country which may show a slight increase risk for breast cancer. we really don't have any hard evidence for that at this point in time. there are two issues. dr. tilton mentioned the resources that the faa has to calculate out radiation doses that wally friedman did. that's called, it's available on the website, and i know alpa and the associations have folks are looking at radiation issues. also the white paper that he mentioned earlier looks at possibly asking the airlines with monitoring radiation dosages, much like a radiation,

radiation type worker would wear a dosimeter. for the individual pilot though those answers are not satisfactory. so we are confronted with a situation where people may ask us about what to do. the person who is at highest risk is the pregnant pilot in her first trimester. and that's an individual decision about whether she should fly or not, there are certain strategies we recommend that people would take if they would elect to continue to fly. that woman should probably fly at the lower latitudes because of the greater shielding from the ozone. and also fly lower altitudes to get more protection. so the short duration flights in the southern latitudes would be a significantly lower radiation exposure than someone doing a transport route, on an individual basis that's the

information we can do now but hopefully there will be actual race and we compare those to radiation workers. >> good afternoon, gentlemen. i'm kevin hyde, the coo of the flight safety foundation. in the opening rudder eyes dr. tilton have you talked about evidence based medicine. that piqued my interest because in the safety world where all interested in evidence-based trained. those types of things that i was one if you might be able to go into it just for a few minutes about what that means as far as evidence based medicine, who is collecting that data, and how are you using that data to help us as pilots? >> the way we collect that data is getting information from just general studies on various kinds of cancers, or various kinds of medical issues but effectively if you could look at heart

disease, for instance, and as i said in my earlier remarks, three or four years ago if someone had high blood pressure they got disqualified if they had a heart attack they got disqualified. if they had even heart transplant they got disqualified. because we felt the risk, and our primary concern that we have is looking at catastrophic risk. i tell people if i can figure out if someone has a particular problem, and i can safely certified for six months and then they'll fall over dead on six-month and one day, i would certify that person for a six-month. the problem is there's a lot of art in the business and it's not all sides. but what we can do is we can look at particular kinds of cancer and say that the most likely problem with that will be maybe a spread to the bone rather than to the brain. that's the big problem because if a cancer spreads to the brink of sometimes the first time we know it is there is one had a seizure which is not a very good enough in an airplane. so we look at the data. we try to determine what kind of

problem a particular person might have and we do this based on looking at the literature. we also look at our cohort which means our people, our pilots to see what they have. and see if we can gather any restricted you ask who is collecting the information. we have millions of records that people we been certifying over the years. the problem is that our database is not what's called a relational database. so it's difficult for us in some ways to go through the database and pick out particular issues. although we're getting better at it. there's a medical information system in the faa which is a really collection medical information systems. not medical information. information systems which is collecting over study databases and putting that together to look at access to see if there's a way we could prospectively look at accident the previous owner database in medical which

takes the database i told you about and then looks at it to determine whether or not a particular medical condition could create an accident. the first clear data we got that we did that with was a particular condition called atrial fibrillation where they were able to get the data, alina to make sure there were not errors in the day and it was clean, and determined that a person with atrial fibrillation treated a specific way was cleared to fly. we are looking at doing that with other conditions to make sure that when we certify someone we can do it safely, but also to allow us to certify more people than we might have disqualified in the past. >> very interesting. thank you for your comments. >> i'm from alaska airlines. i was wondering if you would promote a policy which instead of having an arbitrary age 65

retirement, but instead depend on individual examination as one got older, past age 65? >> the reason i call, not because of your question. [laughter] eickhoff because i've been coughing for several weeks. in fact, when i told quay, he said you should see a doctor. i said it did seem a doctor. in fact, is my ame and he told me to take some antibiotics which i'm doing right now. i'm still coughing so i apologize for that. but refreshment again what you asked. 65, yes. working on my brain, too. so we had a big problem with age 60, and the reason we have that is, there is a specific ruling in the faa that says if you have a safety rule, in order to change that safety rule you must prove that it is as safe as our savior than it was before. so we had a difficulty trying to

get to age 65 for that very reason. because while it look like with people moving -- living longer and aging slower and seeing people that were dying later on and you look at longevity, that people could safely fly airplanes up to age 65 and i think as we go beyond the law that changed 860 to 65, that we demonstrated that it was safe to do so. but it was done so by congress passing a law. now, if you ask me should we change from 65 to 70, the problem is that people are two different kinds of age. than her chronological age which means to go from one to two to 10 to 50 to 90 come and also have a physiological age. and there's some people that should be safely fly, could be safely flying up into the '80s but, in fact, we have lots of people that are certified over flying private -- private. australia doesn't have an age restriction, although there are

pilots that can fly internationally and less of a flight into a country that allows him to do that because they don't need icao standards which also has age 65. so if i could figure out a way to measure someone's physiological age, then i would certainly say i would support implied beyond age 65 commercially. the problem is that i might also be finding some of the over the 35 shouldn't be flying physiologically which also would create a problem. so again, arrange with the size, and i don't know how to do that to support, to support it other than the fact that possibly in future when looking at people looking after longevity, looking up at a medical condition make it, making sure that physiologically their okay to fly be on that. then we could again figure out a way to maybe go beyond age 65. but right now we don't know how to do that. >> at the time of the age 65 today, i know alpa had a

blue-ribbon panel to look at the. linda came out your office and we had some discussion there. there were two issues. one was the risk of sudden incapacitation such as a heart attack, a stroke, a seizure or any other event. and the other was issue of subtle incapacitation. when you look at the data on flight safety foundation and arrow safety won't publish the most recent paper that i saw, you find that the risk of sudden incapacitation really for the most part it is age independent, the largest group of incapacitation's, as fred said, could beat ear, nose and throat, or g.i. seizures can happen with any age depending on -- heart attacks, sure, they happen and older folks. you are able to test for the medically, but from a public health perspective, the number of false positives you get in in

a systematic population doesn't justify testing that group of people. the bigger worry was the subtle incapacitation. there's a perception that there's cognitive -- is the perception. it's a fact that there's some cognitive decline with age and. you gave me a good study, a good paper on that from a gentleman from the naval air medical institute who had done that. the question is, where do you draw the line and do you do testing? and does the testing that is available give you relevant aeromedical cognition information? and our recommendation was that the training process was a better proxy than doing testing on individuals. because of the variability. and as fred said, if you institute that as a requirement you would have some 35-year-olds who wouldn't qualify. they wouldn't be the cognitive standards where you could have people who were 75 or 80 years

old. we have seen those standards. those are a very difficult situation. i was pleased to see the faa essentially the standards identical to what they are, and they are a man who are 80 and even in the '90s to hold a first class medical certificate. the age 65 restriction is a state jurisdiction based on operations rather than on a medical issue. >> good afternoon. mark pinsky, the delta alpha aeromedical chairman. i work closely with doctor snyder and i just wanted to pass along my sincere thanks for much has predicted the success of the ss are. it's changed lives. i take phone calls on a regular basis. i wanted to point out a lot of unintended consequences, and

what i know of two adult who are flying on the ssri, i can think of at least a dozen others who have entered a treatment and not have to go on it for life. yet because that was available we were willing to go and seek counseling, seek help that was a. saw want to thank you. it really does make a difference. the question i have, though that goes with it, national institute of mental health data suggests that the numbers should be significantly higher. then we are seeing. we're seeing the numbers in double digits and it should be more for a large by the crew. what can you do to help us help identify those people so that they get the help that they need so that they can return? because everyone who does seek it out eventually does return, or virtually in our experience.

>> that problem worries me. it's one of the things people say keep me up at night. and the reason it keeps me up at night is i think we're probably more conservative and we need to be. if you're aware of the standard that we have, we require a person who has been on medication for over a year to be stable for over a year. and that's the biggest concern. the reason we did that is because we want to make sure that we don't certify someone and then find out down the road that that was a mistake. and probably the best example of that is a medication called chantix which was used and still is used to prevent smoking. we actually certify people on chantix for a while and then we started finding out how a fact the fda put out a notice called a black label noticed that said those people were having a significant increase in suicidal tendencies in some case actual suicide. and we had to go back and

uncertified all those people because we were concerned that suicidal ideation, or actual suicidal acts was not a think we should safely certify people for. so when we went from not certifying people with depression and certifying people on antidepressants, we were concerned that we want to make sure we get it right. although we think that in the long run we will reduce the year to some shorter period of time, and also even our regulations now. we only certify for different drugs. although we have said that if we find other medications, and i'm certain as medical science improves medications and approves the research that will find other better drugs and medications than the ones we're using now that will increase the number of medications that individuals could just and the safely certification. the other thing is that your

library that makes people way, some of them say they either have been taking them and say well, i know that other people are certified, so it's probably okay for me to continue to do this and not reported because i know i'm going to lose my longevity for some period of time. so that's kind of a dis- inhibitor that we have that can convince people that we shouldn't be acknowledging those. some other people might say i understand that have to wait a year. i am depressed, but i can't afford it or i don't want to be disqualified for some period of time. and so they are flying in a depressed state, which is also not good. so i'm looking at better ways to certificate people, to get more people an opportunity to get certificated as they needed, to reduce the certification time they require to be on the medications so that we can offer this to more individuals because i agree with you, the data on the number of people who are certificated are probably not

equal to what the number are in the normal population, in the noncertified, nonflying population. and so i think there are people that need to get an opportunity and we're working on ways to do that. >> i didn't i just want to say thank you because it has made a difference in many, many lies. so thank you. >> you're welcome. >> good afternoon, gentlemen. line captain. this question for dr. snyder. as you know we represent pilots in canada and u.s. i'm wondering if you could elaborate on your relationship with our regulator in canada, transport canada? and if you could elaborate on any appeal is to the transportation, appeals tribunal in canada, and any denial as you

might've seen their that might've been certified in the u.s., or vice versa, if you're aware of any differences. >> i'd be happy to come in to our canadian brothers and sisters are very, very independent. the calls that we get from canadian pilots usually relate to the effect of medications, surgical options of the account different types of treatments, or policies with respect to the faa. in canada get a much closer relationship with what we would call aviation medical examiner's here. and the regional flight surgeons. there seems to be a very collegial interchange of information. also, mr. dave noble from toronto doesn't absolutely fantastic job in coordinating the resources that our canadian pilots use. and has been very successful. we don't have direct

interactions with dr. david southbury, who is the gentlemen who heads up, who is fres equipment up in canada. on individual cases but we do communicate with him on policy issues. but i can't give you any data on individual cases where denials have been appealed to him. done through our office. mr. noble and murray munro are the gentlemen who coordinate that. >> thank you. >> i just want to briefly as you, i know we touched on the risk of knowing that pilots, or maybe starting to see, just talking to other airline pilots, the thought that there is no windows in the cockpit of the aircraft should be protecting us from the sun. i want to see if you any guidance for us or opinion among the ame community that perhaps

those windows are not protecting us. we should be seeking out shall protection using sunblock, that sort of thing. protecting us not only some damage but perhaps melanoma. >> i don't think this is so much inane equation as it is a general health question. probably if you walk around with black clothes and an umbrella from the time your age six months or when you could start walking, you would be better off than if you didn't do that. and what dr. snyder said earlier was that we are not sure whether the risk that pilots have is attributable to being in an airplane or the fact that they may have more leisure time and they're flying -- lying on the beach somewhere signing themselves. i know when i was young, which was when they were wearing blue and gray uniforms, i used to go out everyday in the sun and i didn't wear sunblock and i would get baked and then by the end of the summer i would be brown and

hand and the sun didn't seem to bother me. but i was still cooking myself in the sun. people in my generation grew up that way. i strongly recommend to people wear sunblock when i got in the sun even if they're there in a short bit of time. i recommend people wear hats and i think everyone should do that regardless of the occupation. so i wouldn't say so much that i would recommend for pilots necessary that there were a sunblock other than i would recommend that everybody wear sunblock. and protect themselves from the sun. that doesn't mean i think you should be a mock and live in a cave and never go out and the sun, because you even need the sun to provide vitamin production. the sun is not a bad thing but i can you do everything else, you need to moderate what you do. when you go out in the sun you should wear clothing and leisure bathing and you should wear sunblock to protect yourself. >> i think also the physics are that the uva uvb is avidly

screened through the cockpit windshield. with very -- we worry about what penetrates the heavy particles that penetrate such as protons when there are soldiers. but if we were successful in getting some sort of responsibility either through a osha, the faa, the companies in getting dosimetry studies of pilots, we have a much better idea of what the true radiation exposure is, and then we can compare that to known data that we have to try to make an estimate as to the risks for certain types of cancer. but at this point we just don't have that data. >> is there any interest in collecting that data soon? is there a pushback from the industry? >> there's an interest and i would encourage you to pick up a copy of the alpa white paper that i alluded to in my opening remarks regarding occupational safety and health for pilots,

with a proposal from alpa to create a partnership between the faa, osha, industry and labor. to see if we could get that instituted and then monitored and then perhaps action based on the results of the. at this point it doesn't exist. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> i'm bill on the alpa air safety staff. first of all, dr. tilton, i'm really sorry to hear about wally friedberg's passing. he was always a very knowledgeable individual, and they go to person for any questions we had on radiation, radiation issues. we appreciated his expertise, being available to us. the faa and alpa and industry have a long history of collaboration on the number of issues that dr. snyder mentioned, the hymns program that goes back 30, 35 years to help people for pilots with

issues in regard to alcohol, substance abuse. dr. tilton, i'm wondering if you could share with us any thoughts you may have on collaborative efforts that the faa and alpa could enter into to ensure and improve pilot health and safety? >> i guess the best collaborative effort i'm aware of right now is what we have with dr. snyder screw. he represents not only alpa, he represents other organizations as well, and their philosophy, in fact you may i may not be aware that none of his doctors are ame's, aviation medical examiners, because they want have no idea there's a conflict between them as designees versus people that actually support the organizations they work with. not to say that that doesn't

meet their fully qualified and competent to do that if they wanted to be. they certain know all of our regulations, and they understand why we do things. but as i said earlier, we meet with in quarterly, and frequently we get calls from them. i talked to quay not weekly but quite frankly about specific cases, specific issues, specific concerns that he and his group might come up. i also do that with baa and as i said aopa as well. so the collaboration that i see as having people with medical knowledge that understand what's going on in the community, working together to find whatever science we can to make sure that what we're doing is safe and what we're doing is the right thing for the safety of the community, and also the pilots that operate in it. so i don't have a better answer than that because there aren't a lot of individuals that have not only the expertise in the site, but also the expertise in aerospace medicine.

if you look at our doctors in the faa, we have over 15 individuals who are board certified in aerospace medicine. doctor standish group are all that way. and so we understand not only the science of the medicine but also the science in a way that particular issues interact with someone when they're in the cockpit, or in a cabin or maintaining airplanes on the ground. so using that information we do the best we can to certify as many people we can but do it safely at the same time. >> thank you. >> i think the great example that you brought up, bill, was the program that's been in place intermittently since 1974. the faa funds the program. they provide the funds, which is administered through alpa to educate the entire airline industry as to the disease process about alcoholism and substance dependence.

and to find a way to readily identify, treat, rehabilitate, return to flight status under a rigorous program. but without the faa's support we would go nowhere in the. and what we are seeing is that other international organizations really want what the faa has established with alpa. they want information how do we do this. because before the problem went underground. as fred said, if you have hypertension, when he was wearing his blue and gray uniform, i don't know if you with a blue or a great guy, when he was wearing that uniform, you are disqualified. certainly the study comes from back in the '70s when you couldn't say airline pilot and alcohol in the same paragraph or even in the same paper. the name has stuck. the effectiveness has just increased and its spread, but it's done in close collaboration with the faa, with the airlines,

and support from the management and from the pilot unions, and then also the aerospace medical community. the faa trains a very limited number of physicians to our hims program who are qualified to serve as sponsors. and those same physicians who are qualified to serve as independent medical sponsors for the pilots and recovery are the same ones that provide the scrutiny that the faa requires for the people on the ss our eyes as well. it's a great program. extremism successful and is probably the premier example of cooperation and collaboration between the faa and industry. >> great. thank you. >> hello. i'm the chairman. earlier you a loaded the other countries certified pilots with medical conditions such that they would only be able to fly

with another crew member, which i never heard of before. i was interested to know if, when, if there are any state in the number of instances of incapacitation on that basis versus the sort of single pilot basis that you said we're using. and then further if the faa has considered using that standard going forward, maybe based on shortage of pilots and things that we will need to cover that? >> i don't think there are any specific studies that have done to show that. i really frankly believe that i'm not sure how it helps if we, let me say differently. when i used to go to europe every corner and talk to these people i would argue about the fact they were unnecessarily disqualifying people, people that we felt were certainly safe to fly. people that we would qualify on a special issues. for instance, with a bypass surgery. they were very conservative and

they would not let those people fly unless they had another person in the cockpit. i can't think of an incident where there was someone that they qualified that we wouldn't have qualified to be in a two-person cockpit. so what i think if they were unnecessarily restricting people so they couldn't fly by themselves. and by that i mean by themselves without someone else in the cockpit who was fully qualified in case they had a medical condition. so i can't think of a situation that would cover the question you have, which is can we get more pilots in the cockpit if we made a decision to certify people are restricting them. we also actually, years ago in the '90s, were prevented from putting restrictions on firstclass pilots because we lost a lawsuit in which we are restricting flight engineers that they need a firstclass

certificate, but they can only fly as flight engineers and we lost a lawsuit and the law says we can't restrict a firstclass certificate. so there's legal precedents to say we can't do it. plus i really believe when i talk to my counterpart in europe, they were overly restrictive and didn't need to do what they were doing. >> i would say that the faa community better chance of having a medical certificate in the united states than any other country in the world. there are a few exceptions as the ssri before or perhaps with insulin requiring diabetes in canada. but the evidence-based medicine policy has allowed the liberalization of the standard and waivers that pilots get, and we are just thrilled with the spectrum of the. there have been some studies about in flight incapacitation but it didn't discriminate between two pilot crews and one pilot crews. but i believe that there's never a reported accident in the

united states, aircraft accident in the united states as a result of incapacitation in flight in the commercial situation with a two pilot crew. but the aerospace medicine association has published two studies over the last 12 or 13 years i believe on reported in flight incapacitation. that gets called into the faa as crew member incapacitation and then goes to the normal investigative process. >> is one of the common. i really believe today and i tell people when i was flying c-141, we didn't have an fms, essentially we're flying a big airplane. but i felt pretty confident that if something happened to my copilot i could go ahead and take over and land the airplane and talk on the reader into all the stuff i needed to do. but in today's world as you're well aware with flight management systems and programming and the way we fly airplanes now in our airspace, if you take, if you take a triple seven at fly into heathrow and you're in weather,

that's really a coupon at operation. the second pilot is not there to make sure that the first pilot from the other pilots in capacity, he can land the airplane, he is there and he or she has a specific responsibility, and they are necessary in order to safely operate. now i know airlines to incapacitating and is supported. would've case of a people are incapacitated but that's not optimal and i would much prefer to have a situation where both pilots are fully qualified and medically competent when i'm flying situations such as i described. >> anymore questions out there? is everybody satisfied and happy? >> or a sleep. >> then i guess we will rapid a. i want to thank our distinguished guests. thank you, dr. snyder, dr. tilton. again, thank you for all the

questions. thank you and have a good day. [applause] >> excellent panel. very, very interesting subject matter to all of us that are out there flying airplanes. okay, that concludes our business for today. before we break for the evening, retired to a reception sponsored by boeing just out here in the foyer, allow me just a moment to take care of some housekeeping items and go over the schedule for tomorrow. either way, you will see in each of your seats a valuation form printed on blue paper. before you leave the room please fill it out and place it in one of the baskets in the back of the rim. or return to the registration table in the hall. your comments are very important to us. as for tomorrow we will start with a cup no breakfast with our exhibitors from 7:30 a.m. to 838 but it's a good egregiously to look over the booths.

we encourage everyone to take advantage of that. we would get our presentations at 8:30 a.m. starting with a talk on risk-based security. some have a lot going on tomorrow and you won't want to miss it. thanks for being with us today, and thanks for sennheiser corporation for launching and the form but cast. see you at the boeing reception at 5:30. we stand adjourned until 830 time back tomorrow morning. thank you. [applause] more now from the airline pilots association forum on aviation safety. in this discussion officials with the transportation security administration and customs talk about cargo plane secured. >> good morning, everyone. i hope you had an enjoyable evening under fully caffeinated

fofor a day of very interesting discussions. i want to once again thank boeing for sponsoring the reception last night and thanks to canada airlines for america, and all of our sponsors who, with their support, make this event possible. we appreciate your support. [applause] >> please major cell phones and other electronics and keep them you didn't want you are here in the hall, thank you. i don't think i'll get an argument from this statement. nothing has changed more in the airline industry during the past 11 years than aviation security. whether it's the tsa striving to improve techniques for passenger screening, installing secondary barriers to better protect airline cockpits are ruthless assault, or visionary initiatives like known crewmember program, tougher security is now a permanent component of today's aviation dna.

the question is, as our security network just gotten harder to get through, or has it gotten smarter? we are starting this morning with a discussion on the risk-based concept, how to make the process more efficient, increasing the throughput, and find the bad guys before they can hurt us. moderating this panel is my esteemed colleague, captain fred eissler, a federal express, alpa's aviation security chair. captain eissler. [applause] >> chuck, thank you very much. good morning and welcome. i'm captain fred eissler, i served as the aviation security chairman and a flight the md-11 for fedex. is a pleasure for me to welcome each of you to our conference today and to our panel discussion on the need for weeding out evildoers to risk-based security. this discussion is intended to delve in to numerous aspects of risk-based security initiatives

and programs that are applied throughout the aviation sector by government and industry. u.. a risk-based approach to solving the aviation demand is

not a the strategy has been prevalent in air safety related matters for decades and its use has become more prevalent over the years, particularly in the identification of precursors to accidents and incidents. it is clear the debris for word in aviation security is through an intelligence driven risk-based approach. the vast majority of people and cargo transport on commercial aircraft pose no intended threat to aviation. knowing this, a one-size-fits-all approach to screening does not make good sense, nor is it most effective use of our limited screening resources. in fact, adopting a one-size-fits-all screening approach in the aviation environment wastes time and resources and reduces unachievable margins of security. alpa has set off the need for intelligence driven risk-based aviation security strategies long before the defense of 9/11. for example, in the mid 1990's our association was a major

contributor to the development of the original computer assisted passenger prescreening system or caps program. as difficult as a methodology for airline passengers in order to identify those persons considered to pose a higher degree of risk to aviation and than subject them and their belongings to appropriate levels of screening. early last year alpa published a white paper on risk-based security which advocated many of the changes that tsa has made or is presently making. following the 9/11 attacks, our nation witnessed the creation of the department of homeland security and the transportation security administration. we also saw the reinvigoration of the federal air marshal service. alpa enjoys a very close working relationship with maintaining and improving the speed and we

are pleased to have the director of fams with us today. another of the early post 9/11 programs that alpa strongly promoted is the cockpit access security system. because of legitimate security concerns stemming from the 9/11 attacks, traditional access to the flight deck is severely limited by the government regulation. these restrictions have a noticeable negative impact on the airline industry operations. cash resolve those concerns by affording you reliable means to positively identify a pilot's identity and current employment status in real time. facilitating flight crew members and authorized personnel to ride in the jumpsuit once again. beta testing of this program began on august 10th, 2003 and

the full implementation was approved in june, 2004. it's used today and is proven to be a remarkably effective program. speaking of the screening alpa wasn't ticketed for all airline policy subject to alternative risk based methodology that is different from traditional check point screening protocols. to remedy this problem, alpa conceived of the crew pass, personal advanced screening system. it results in the program being implemented as the agency's first risk-based aviation security initiative in 2008. at the airports this occurred. dwi, hid and columbus of carolina. crew pass has been replaced by a new system called known crewmember, or kcm.

known crewmembers a program co-sponsored by alpa and american airlines for america or a4a with support of the tsa. as of today, known crewmembers operational at 18 airports and planned to be in place at 31 domestic airports by the end of calendar year 2012. it is the centerpiece of the growing list of the tsa risc based initiatives and is not accompanied by others such as pre-check, passengers under 12 or over 75 years of age, on our flights and use of behavioral detection officers. we are grateful to the tsa administrator john pistol for spearheading the focus on implementing risk-based screening protocols and we are extremely pleased to have dug hofsass with us today to elaborate more on tsa's perspective on its risk-based security efforts. among the ever government agencies adopting the risk-based security programs, as customs

and border protection cbp. we are grateful for cbp's efforts in this regard such as the global gentry and u.s. visit programs which are designed to reduce delays and associated with international travelers prior to their entry into the united states. this participation in the national targeting center, the customs and trade partners against her some initiative and other risc based programs. cbp spearheads to protect the nation's borders. we look forward to hearing about the cbp initiatives from the port director terry davis running as as the cbp representative. along with us today to revive in sites and the increased application of the risk-based security strategies and the all ricardo oral was the airlines for america's cargo service director ms. liz shaver to talk about the advanced cargo screening system, or acas.

thank you for your kind attention and now i would like to bring our distinguished panelists one at a time. we will begin a tsa administrator, assistant administrator bray and follow with doug hofsass, ms. liz shaver followed by mr. carey davis in that order. thank you very much for being with us today. >> good morning. i would like to thank the great introduction by captain fred eissler and the invitation for everyone at alpa to speak at the forum as we continue to build a relationship between tsa and alpa. i will talk about risk-based security in the service and some of the layers of security that tsa uses to defeat terrorists. as the assistant administrator

the office of law enforcement i try this panel of distinguished guests to discuss a topic that is of primary importance to all of us. aviation and risk-based security. tsa under the direction of the administrator john pistol recognizes the importance of risk-based security and deviation domain and has taken several steps to implement new programs supporting risc based security and is a leading counterterrorism organization and the federal government. i will talk about the history of the fair to the good air marshal service to give context where we were and where we are today. the federal air marshal service was in 1962 after a series of hijackings the first were sworn in by the attorney general robert kennedy in 1962. from 1962 until september 11th, 2001 a roller-coaster budget

cycle history with a number of people working for them on september 11th, 2001 there was only a handful of federal air marshal's many flu international missions. obviously all of that has changed since then since the tragic events of september 11, 2001 and now we are a large robust organization. but now like most federal agencies, we face budget to become budget challenges. in order to meet those challenges about a year ago we started to work within our organization and all of tsa to look at our staffing headquarters and across the nation within the federal air marshal service we've gone from five operational divisions to three and now we are starting to look at where our field offices are and how to staff and that is a part of the process you will know probably better than i that in the ten years since 9/11 15

significantly where you fly and in the process of looking at that. federal air marshal service is also involved in the other aspects of aviation security with a primary mission always being the flying finn working on things. but the reference to extend throughout the transportation domain. federal air marshals are a risk-based in-flight law enforcement presence offering flexible will interest the response for emerging threats for deployment anywhere in the transportation domain. the federal air marshal service has always been utilizing the concept that assesses risk as a function of consequence, vulnerability and intelligence. we recognize not all flights are created equal. every u.s. carrier flight is

categorized based on the rest of that flight. like other security components, the federal air marshal service must utilize limited resources and effective and efficient manner and therefore coverage on the highest risk flights he will know about 25,000 commercial flights domestically in the united states everyday and we also focus on those flights, the international flights but we have a risk matrix for all the flights. to utilize the risk-based model that is intelligence driven one of the elements of that is the information that we gather and the current threats and the intelligence of their net throughout the world. the federal air marshal service information coordination section works with tsa office of intelligence analysis and other federal agencies. we have personnel assigned to many different federal agencies here in washington, d.c. that focus on intelligence we gather

that information and use that information to build the risk-based missions visual system. a very large part of our information cord nason section and the rule is the transportation security operations center here in northern virginia within the federal air marshal service to expand the organization. in the tsoc which recall the tradition security operation center we have people there 24 slash ex-offender mother regencies people from the faa, department of defense, many other agencies that court amid the gathering of intelligence and in some instance in the domain and the essential element of that is to gather the information and pushed it back out to all the schricker ports 450 domestic airports and stakeholders so we never have another incident like 9/11 and

instead awareness of events that occurred in the entire transportation domain. another element that we have as far as that information coordination is every day the senior leadership team gets a briefing from the tsoc that occurred previously and the intelligence and that we have received through the office of intelligence analysis so we take that information and use that to guide us through our strategies and even planning and responses another important aspect of the federal air marshal service's the shuttle flight deck officer program. it's played an important role in the seat yet security of commercial aviation passengers and cargo aircraft through thousands of pilots on a

voluntary basis participate in this program. there the last line of defense and complement the holistic risk-based approach tsa use is in providing presence throughout the aviation environment. for those of you in the audience today have chosen to produce a peaden this program, i'd like to express my sincere gratitude to you for your dedication and service to the country. the program is also facing a rapidly changing budget. there was possible the the budget was going to decline. now hopefully that has been resolved and will be able to grow the program next year but it's not fully resolved so we will work on that. another program is to control assessment so we have layers of security throughout the

airports, the ffdo come intelligence, environmental awareness to keep the evildoers' house we call them outside of their force to get the physical parameters we work closely with the fbi and recommendations to improve airport security and other is the manpower program that is based off all the work we've done with the airport and the united kingdom arnall from them and now we have a very robust assessment we do it domestic airports and the invitation of some we go over there and do that to raise awareness for the locals that responsibility at the airports. it's the prevention response program some of you may have heard of. it's an essential element for us because when you study terrorism and you look at what happened on

9/11 or the train bombings in london and madrid for even the mumbai incident you look at the number of the operations done by the terrorists themselves to conduct and pick their targets so the program is a random intelligence driven program to put visible and covert personnel into the domain to detect and deter and defeat the terrorists and it's important to understand the global reach of terrorism when you look at mumbai and we study all of these events about the people of the americans david headley who participate in the operation surveillance for that attack in mumbai to read the burba effectively works with state and local law enforcement officers that have the responsibility for securing the transportation domain. thir strategically positioned throughout the nation to identify and mitigate threats.

it they augment local assets while opportunities are mobile and can be rapid in response to a specific credible intelligence these are some of the risk-based intelligence programs that we detect and prevent terrorism. i'm sure my colleague doug hofsass will talk about others but i would be remiss if i didn't think everyone of you in the audience today who directly support efforts within the aviation transportation demand. each of us, everyone of us as a result of our specific role is responsible for the safety and security of the public. we must work together and without your assistance and support everyone in tsa and the federal air marshal service who are dedicated to the mission could not be successful. we are in this fight together and it is my promise to you that

it will remain that way. thank you for the invitation today and please stay safe. [applause] good morning everyone. it's great to be here with our friends with alpa again and my personal thanks to the captain for inviting me to believe continued to enjoy the opportunity to move the working relationship with alpa to a strategic partnership and i often get asked the question what's the difference between the two and the difference between the two is strategic partnership is different than in working relationship when you share the same vision and the same goal but you also have an understanding in your able to increase each others' limitations as organizations has over the last couple of years we have enjoyed the opportunity to move that working relationship towards a strategic partnership

and we are committed to continue with of that effort. as captain eissler what about in your year to hear administrator john pistole we've been turning away from the one-size-fits-all security monitoring and really moving towards a risk-based intelligence driven security model so what i thought i would talk to you today is a couple specifics about what that really means for you, some of the programs you are becoming more familiar with. tsa paycheck, the dhs trusted traveler program being connected, known crewmember and a couple of the traditional initiatives i would like to give you awareness outside of the airport domain. let's talk first about the philosophy of what risk-based security is read in the world of limited resources, the effort behind the risk-based security is about the most effective security and the most efficient way so what that means with the development of program policies

and plans everything we are doing should do three things does it improve security? does it create efficiency in a system and does it reduce the burden on operators? if the initiatives we are working on to the end of the risk-based secure deconstruct don't do one of those three things, then we are not doing something right and as we talk for some of the initiatives like project and international cargo screening and efforts with general aviation, you will see those policies, programs and plans a line with those priorities. talk first about known crewmember. this is a great success story and partnership particularly with our friends at alpa and also airlines for america. as captain eissler talk about that in 2008 we started with three locations under the construct we've grown that program significantly past the pilot's fate isn't sitting with 18 locations in the month of august this year we will be at

31 locations by november 1st to read part of the principle behind known crewmember is taking a look from a trust standpoint of what is our level of trust and confidence with populations based on additional security measures, background checks, intelligence reporting, security threat assessments, do we have populations in the screening environment that we can move away from a one-size-fits-all and do more of a risk-based security so that we don't do as much physical security at the airport because of the prescreening and security validation before the individual arrives at the airport. obviously the first population that comes to mind those men and women that are trusted to fire commercial aircraft throws a partnership with alpa we are committed to the known crimber program for those of you that had the opportunity to use it i'm sure you've enjoyed the experience as i talked about from three priorities improving security, creating efficiencies and reducing the word among operators, we are doing all three of those through the known

crimber program. the way that we are harnessing the power of the system and verifying the date of departure of the eligibility, the total and currency of the crew member processing through the checkpoint is a level of security that we have significantly improved through the checkpoint. as i indicated, they're going to be at 31 locations by november november 1st. those locatio represent most of the largest airports and the largest domicile areas in the country. we will be working with alpa and a4a owsley push towards next year to get additional locations in 2013. but also excited about the opportunity to include flight attendants and he may have seen the announcement on that in the last couple of weeks in the partnership with alpa, a4a and the others we are excited about bringing in from flight attendants into the unknown crewmember program as well later this year or early next let's talk about tsa project for those of you who've been traveling the

missing information up the tsa project is the first backstedt has the first initiative and really trying to get away from a one-size-fits-all security process at the checkpoint itself for the regular traveler. we are currently today after 21 locations across the country are 20 of location was st. louis, our 21st location was actually earlier this week in indianapolis and we are not on track to be at 35 locations, 35 of the nation's largest airports and truffle markets by the end of the calendar year. what preach it is for those of you that are not familiar this is a process in which customers are able to voluntarily become eligible for the tsa pre-check which is an advanced type of security screenings when you get to the airport you are afforded the opportunity to have expedited screening. that screening includes a dedicated lane one we've validate the eligibility for pre-check through the encoding on the boarding pass.

the experience those travelers receive enables them to leave their shoes on, they're built on in most cases, white outer garments and keep your liquids and electronics in your bag. for the folks that have used paycheck to date obviously very strong positive feedback to customers as the use that as we talk about security we always talk about improving security, creating efficiencies in the system and reducing the burden on operators one of the things we are trying to explain a little bit better is the amount of security that we can do from a voluntary standpoint if passengers are willing to share information about themselves before they traveled we're doing that for the eligible frequent-flier programs now and through the citizen members of the trust of traveler programs like bull entry, nexus and century if people are willing to share information about themselves go through the process of becoming a trusted traveler program holder we get

to the airport we are not doing as many physical screening things as we have in the regular screening process so we are excited that the continued partnership with the airlines and cbp and looking at additional populations for 2013 to continue to expand the program but we are very excited about the opportunity this will give us at the checkpoint to reprogram some of our staff, a group that and procedures to some of the locations that perhaps we want to look for dangerous and deadly types of things. 35 locations by the end of the calendar year that is through a partnership with five major deutsch as airlines. that's america called dalton and united, usair ways and alaska airlines to the appeal looking for 2013 to have at least two additional carriers joined the program to be as we talk about risk-based security we are

talking about moving away from the one-size-fits-all. we've talked about pre-check and known crewmember. these are ways to get populations of people but we have higher trust and confidence with because of information they have volunteered for information we have on file of repealed of the regular screening process and put them through an expedited security prices because of the amount of verification and validation, front-end. some other programs and initiatives we have to get underway as a part of the risk faced security construct the made modifications for children under 12. screening related procedural changes to facilitate children are 12 of the checkpoint. we also made modifications for adults over 75. again, screening modifications at the checkpoint and all of this ties together that as we head towards 2013 we want to be able to start to intersect the risk-based security initiatives so that we are able to generate the efficiencies in the system. i will talk briefly about the

international air cargo because we seem to talk a lot about things at the airport because they are more visible. the coordination and collaboration with a4a coming u.s. airlines, friends at cbp, one of the things we've been looking at for some time as a way to take the risk based security model into the international air cargo environment. much like we are doing with the check our ability to know about the shippers and packages and to have levels of trust with of those who do business regularly with cbp and the carriers we're looking at a contract for international air cargo those that volunteer information about themselves and participate in cbp programs and share information regularly that have good account standing that we are able to use different screening protocols and different measures with those shipping partners in those corridors and the shipping personal goods. so sharing, treating

efficiencies and reducing the burden of operators cascades over into some of the programs and we will probably be talking about that later in the panel. i want to create a picture that regard of the mode of transportation that tsa is partnering with or regardless of the population with there is a package, there is a process or a person in our ability to get information about things in advance and a voluntary compliance fashion to allow us to make good intelligence driven risk-based decisions before the screening process begins, that is the target for us to be more effective and efficient security agency so i think you for your time and we will stand by for questions. [applause] my name is elizabeth shaver and i work for american airlines cargo service we are a tree association that represents u.s. carriers.

we carry about 90% of the u.s. cargo traffic in the world today and i should have a presentation coming up here shortly. there we go. i'd like to take a couple minutes at first to talk about the role of air cargo today. although only 1% of the way of the cargo is carried by aircraft it represents 35% of the value of shipments transported. it's key to the export competitiveness. $424 billion worth of goods left the air last year. that is over one times the value of kilo of that which left by ocean. and one often overlooked aspect of the cargo is the support it provides to passenger carriers. in 2011 which is the year when the profitability fell to 0.2% from 2.2% in the previous year, 21% of passenger airline revenue came from scarborough passenger carriers would be facing significantly increased economic

pressure to result in higher fares and reduced offerings. >> it's the high-value goods, such perishable the flowers you buy for your mom on mother's day and your wife on valentine's day the strawberries you can get in your grocery store, the wild alaskan salmon that's available at the grocery store, live animals come emergency parts for repairs at its aircraft and factory equipment and medical equipment, pharmaceutical and life human organs for transplant to air cargo plays a role just-in-time and logistics' providing 24 to 72 access to the transit time by ship. turning to security specifically as has already been mentioned by several of my colleagues we've made significant progress in the past decade securing the air cargo change.

access control background vetting distinguishing known tree the parties by on known improved screening and cargo extended oversight in the supply chain through programs such as the tsa regulation of air carriers. tsa certified cargo screening facilities programs to the arrival of the airport and as was already mentioned customs trade partnerships against terrorism which certifies the adjusted trade parties but our resources are not confident and we are seeing the move as we mentioned one-size-fits-all prescriptive approach is to the more risk-based outcome focused intelligence approaches 1302 pose more threats and flexible to allow them to be implemented operationally and in an

efficient manner. i'd like to talk specifically about one of those initiatives that's already been mentioned, the air cargo screening them as acss provides considerable improvement to this security and it's done so extremely efficiently by utilizing existing systems and existing process he's in the industry. the slide describes the existing system of today mandated by a trade act all carriers are required to report the details of shipments the transport to the united states to the manifest system. the data must deliver to the system for hours minimum to the aircraft arrival in the u.s. and fit into the targeting system which performs a risk analysis of the shipment based on three key factors one is derogatory information about the data that's being transmitted by confining information and shipment information as soft. second is evolving threats and

30 simply the ability of the system to crunch huge amounts of international trade data to the level to identify anomalous shipments. when they are tagged and importing carrier must halt shipment of the arrival for inspection by cbp. but of course the incident in 2010 pointed to the fact getting this information for our spry prior to the level was it early enough we wanted to get it reloading. this point was made by both tsa and cbp to the u.s. department homeland security committee testimony in november 2010 shortly after the incident. industry government began working together to figure out a way to get the pre-departure data. basically what has been done is an extra step kabul on to the front of the exterior of the amount of the system. the data is delivered as early

as possible into the system. before it is known which flight it will track long and often it is which airline will travel on the targeting system analysis and shipments the require either additional screening deutsch their characteristics or additional data are tagged. the tsa then merckx with the party in the shipment in order to clear that before loading on to the u.s. bound flight. one of the duties is as i'm sure you are all aware a continuing dialogue in the industry about which measures should apply to passenger aircraft verses which. is always ongoing acss cuts across the ddt and eliminates the question and applies to every shipment that travels and the u.s. although it's a voluntary pilot program we expect it to be mandatory in a year or two and all cargo regardless of the aircraft transmits on will be screened in

this fashion. shifting gears to look in the bigger picture we are primarily interested in securing the global supply chain for two main reasons. first, american crews, passengers, cargo and physical assets aren't just found on the flights that depart from the u.s. they are found throughout the world. it's great that we've secure our flights for example to chicago but we prefer all of our flights the secure including the connecting flight from dubai to frankfurt. achieving that requires that we are able to extend robust security standards beyond that last departure in the united states robust standards such as the transportation security of ministration to get sick and the supply chain and the air carriers are a link in the gene that they are not the only link. we are definitely one of the most compliant links and we volume regulatory compliance there aren't other trustworthy

partners that we can leverage to push our robust security standards even further out into the world well beyond that last flight into the u.s.. for the air carriers we would prefer we secured shipments prior at the airport departure the surest way to keep suspicious packages on the aircraft to get to the airport warehouse in the first place. sorry, this is a robust july we will be skipping it. how they fit into the global supply chain pictures by allowing the leverage of enhanced screening based on this advanced data. the ideal world is the earliest possible point in the supply chain delivered to acss targeting system by the parties who have the best knowledge of the data which would be the shippers and potentially the importers. acss targeting would return the screening results back to the

origin station along the earliest party in the chain to provide the necessary screening for additional measures to ensure it isn't a threat. once it is cleared the shipment will travel to a secure supply chain destination. the key is we would avoid the need to prescreen the shipment that the points along the supply chain which is the case today. this is the goal of the air carriers because as we are screening involves breaking down and opening up what would previously secure bup cargo that introduces another opportunity not just for tampering but also lost, debt and other problems with the cargo. one thing that has been noted multiple times is that acss has been in game changer in the way this has been implemented. carriers have been transmitting data for 20 months. as of midnight on august 7th,

29 million, 901,212 shipments have undergone diprete departure screening and all of this has been accomplished with no regulatory mandate all participation is completely voluntary. when acss began its transmissions in december 2010, no one imagine how successful we would be and how many participants the but attract because it has been designed to work with existing operational process he's it's not burdensome to implement and extractive therefore for them to participate and get the huge security benefit that it provides the aircraft. at the heart of the success is that it thinks outside the box. it's willing to try out various options for different business models to see which works best in the experimentation and empirical evidence and to the remarkable degree all parties have come to the table with a very few preconceived notions of how things should be and putting everything on the table for open discussion and testing. we think it is an ideal model

for the security development in the future. industries should be engaged at the beginning stages to leverage our expertise to ensure regulators have a full understanding of the full picture of what they are attempting to regulate and to ensure operationally workable systems are implemented that trade partners will be happy to implement as opposed to resisting. we've got to work together to use all of our smarts to leverage our resources and get maximum creativity in order to defeat those who would do less harm the evildoers we have been talking about today. looking at the big picture and is a pleasure and there's been tremendous progress. starting from the three bottom of the slide the industry participation in the initiative has shown how this industry engagement doesn't just benefit the industry it also benefits the regulators and results in positive security of comes to be putting in place more formal structures to ensure this sort

of industry government co creation takes place on a regular basis can only help us in the future. in the middle of this live the customs authority and securities authorities are working together to high miners the program's one thing about the industry and the governments are working more closely with each other to align their security requirements robust enough so the can mutually recognize each other's programs and the international standards the bodies of icao are working closely to harmonize the security related pergamon are planning on issuing harmonized guidance to the country's on how to implement the customs security program that doesn't have overlapping requirements and functions efficiently. on that note i would like to thank you for your attention and alpa for the chance to speak today.

thank you. [applause] good morning thank captain eissler for having this year to date. u.s. customs and border protection was created within the department of homeland security by u.s. customs service, the inspections division of the naturalization service and the border division of the u.s. to part of agriculture this has created an agency that has a multifaceted role in all of these are based almost wholly on the layered approach and strategy securing the border. our primary mission is to prevent terrorists and their weapons from entering the united

states while facilitating legitimate trade and travel and the entry of legitimate cargo in the united states. this is obviously to sides of the point, every difficult task when it is impossible without working with our partners and tsa. there are cbp employees we have three operational divisions the division covers the skies and what more can you say about that we protect the u.s. but in the ports of entry and cbp officers worked at the ports of entry themselves. the cbp officers are doing because they are the officers you will encounter when you enter the united states and the urals of the officers looking beyond the united states to see what is coming before it actually gets on board your

aircraft. directly after the 9/11 attacks then the commissioner of the u.s. customs service started a layered approach or had a vision for a layer approach starting with the maritime environment on the container security initiative. this was a very successful program where we started placing cbp officers at the seaports of the exit that had containerships coming in the united states. that strategy was successful enough that it evolved into both the passenger and express cargo consignment air cargo arena through programs such as immigration advisory program which was just described. we use these in addition to other items of intelligence gathering such as the advanced passenger information system, with flight manifest transmitted to us electronically. and we take the data and place

them into various databases that allows us to more efficiently target and cut down the numbers of people we have to inspect so we go from 100% inspection of all passengers and cargo back to the more rest based targeted approach. this allows us to focus on the true people who are at a much higher risk for being an evildoer. we work with obviously a multitude of agencies, federal, local and state. i've listed some out here for you. tsa is a major partner. we work directly with the airport's and also in the cargo arena. we really have to sort of structures from both passenger and cargo, both of which use a layer approach where we have information and officers outside of the united states starting the process and looking as mentioned custom st partnership terrorism this is a trade based

approach where our trade partners, shippers and exporters, carrier's voluntarily partner with us and we sense the security specialists to the point of shipping and manufacturing beyond a joke as we go where the grain has grown before it becomes to have it shipped to the united states have it shipped what routes the trucks take before they actually get to the ships of that we know that what is betting on the come dances and the safe before it even gets in the air. we do this with international partners house well. again we will go through some of the systems we use in the approach from the advanced passenger version system is the cornerstone about how we do business for passengers and it's the way we know who's getting on the plan he when they get on the

plane is our way of knowing who's going to board the aircraft for the non-u.s. citizens who are coming to the united states under our visa waiver program. so when you are talking about passengers you have people who are not u.s. citizens but have a visa or do not with no prior visa application. before, we did not know who these people were before they got on the aircraft before they even book a flight. the addition advisory programmer react fully take the cbp officers and place them in foreign airports and ordered the with our foreign counterparts to help screen the flights as they get on or as the passengers board but also to take

information that we gain from p.m. are -- pnr and transmit that to our partners for action on that side. the ports initiative, this allows us to have a more welcoming environment, and facilitate the entry of passengers. we have preclearance locations throughout canada, caribbean, ireland, prepare enzus, quite a program that's been around since the 1950'sa it very effective, the canadian partners are happy with it. the student exchange visitor system interestingly enough after the crisis with iran back in the 70's congress can to customs or immigration and said who are all the students in the united states and we said we don't know. succumb starting in the 70's we started recording disinformation and after 9/11 we have to come up with a better mood of keeping the track of the student

exchange system and this has been very effective and on the other side is facilitating a legitimate students to a much more effective manner. the global gentry which i will speak to in just a moment. u.s. visitor and immigrant status allows us to matchup of these applicants as the same person who applied so it cuts down on the amount of fraud we see on our borders and u.s. visit. so, we partner with many different organizations in order to effect these programs. and again, the idea is we know who is getting on board the aircraft before they get on we want to be what is loaded on the aircraft before it gets loaded this allows us to effectively stop the bad guys while defecting the entry of legitimate travelers and cargo. again, vetting people and things before they're put on board the aircraft is the goal.

we have to have vigilance. this never stops. 24/7 operation and worldwide. the idea is to focus our enforcement efforts. we saw a lot of numbers as far as more than the 20,000 cbp officers and work patrol agents we still have to focus our efforts on where we can be most effective. i put this picture in my presentation. this is the christmas day incident in detroit those are cbp officers first responders taking him off that incident is what started us looking at before things get on the aircraft. global entry is a program which devised in order to facilitate the known interested travelers. it's in 27 locations, that clarence sites we have 27,000 travelers enrolled, that number

is probably low and we have people enrolling every day. the benefits you get the kiosk processing at most major airports in the united states now. this means you don't actually have to stand in line and wait for cdp processing. redos wait times for screening and membership global entry allows you the pre-check program at the selected airports. it also gives you the option enrollment and start the nicoe smart traveler. it's easy to join in and it allows for secure vetting of applicants. we do a continual process on the global entry members so if there is a change in the risk status they are preferred for secondary inspection when they come through, so it's not a one-shot deal. to enroll it's very simple you start the process online by

going to cbp.gov and register and apply the fee is $100 for a five-year term and approval of the electronic system you will be given approval and asked to schedule an appointment which is at most major airports that has global langtry. the interview last about 20 minus, and you are a member of global entry. they will issue a card you don't need it when you present your passport it will recognize you are a member. global entry is open to all u.s. citizens and permanent residents. as of right now dutch citizens, mexican nationals, canadian citizens can use global entry through membership in the next program but the foreign members right now have to be members and their host countries program we have dual vetting systems so that we have a good secure getting on each member.

as you can see there are more reasons someone might be more in knowledgeable than the nationalities that are eligible. i won't go through all of them for the sake of time, but there are obvious reasons one might become ineligible and other less than obvious reasons, but we do that in on every circuit not just criminal administrative issues but for trusted traveler purposes so we know who you are. you can use at most major airports in the united states and we just added one as well, so it is fairly widespread. we are expanding those airports every day. i want to thank all of you for your time and would be happy to take any questions. thank you. [applause] i would like to think the panelists very much for such outstanding thought-provoking

insights and presentations. right now i would like to open the floor to some questions. >> captain of fedex and go through all for the world. this is for doug hofsass as we get out of this philosophy it's going to take an awful lot of guts by what is happening in the pc world. wh do you see as the biggest challenge in that? >> is this on? i'm sorry, what world did you say? >> pc world, politically correct. there's an awful lot of pushback and i would like to hear your thoughts on that. >> one of the principles of the program has been as we started in 2012, giving folks the

opportunity to voluntarily submit information about themselves and volunteer information about themselves to the u.s. government before traveling even the discussion about international inbound aerts cargo because you have in a non-regulated environment industry leaning forward with shippers to verify and fill the information with the premise of the program is if we have populations that are already affected and trusted or we have members of the travelling public the one to volunteer information about themselves or become a member of one of the dhs trusten traveler program the base of the program is about the low risk traveler who had nothing to hide this is not on the tourist watchlist who says i'm willing to submit to additional vetting ahead of trouble. as we look at more aspects of the program in 2013 we have identified frankly additional population beyond what we have

today. it's a very similar concept if you think about all of the setting and the asian that we have on the uniform crew members who are active that is a lot of prescreening and good security work to validate who those people are that they're in good standing and they are not on any list and the status is checked much like the cbp program so if there is a change in status we have that. our programs are about individuals who are willing to share information about themselves with the government so they can receive an expedited screening process which then helps us because we can reprogram some of the resources that they higher risk target or individuals. >> thanks for the question. >> this is a question also for mr. hofsass. tsa has approached aviation

security with implemented combined response in the office of security operations, intelligence and transportation sector network management which is involved in the current office of secure the policy and the industry engagement. you've recently been named to the assistant administrator for risk-based security can you explain how the other tsa divisions into greater efforts with respect to developing and implementing tsa's risk-based approach? >> i talked about the agency's transformation efforts for those of you that heard john pistole talk about the transformation, this is an agency wide transformation that goes across all of our operational and support elements. we are together as a senior leadership team finding a way to run a more efficient and effective security agency. part of that talks through the process as we develop policies,

procedures, programs, plans, even acquisitions are the decisions the we are making and are the programs and policies the we are implementing going after those founding principles i talked about? does it improve security, does it create efficiency in the system and reduce the burden on operators for the traveling public? that is the tenant of the said the leadership team level focus on as we bring proposals to the table or work as a team on decisions. the role of the risk-based security office is about leading a unified effort across the agency for that transformation. those individuals who are working on policy, as individuals and operations, those procuring and installing technology, the office of law enforcement. many of our support components are the employment terse or operators of the design if we do policies, princeton operations and procurements with the mindset of approving security,

creating efficiency in the system and reducing the burden on operators and the traveling public that's going to actually be the transformation of tsa away from a one-size-fits-all security agency to a counter intelligence risk mitigating agency. >> for the air line pilots association this question for the group as we all the flight crew members in the cabin provide possibly the last line of defense against terrorist activities in our aircraft. during a recurrent training, little information regarding current specific events and our own fleets are passed along to us with reviewing discussion. such information on my opinion would further enhance our ability to detect a normal situation and normal passenger

behavior what can be done to increase the amount of information given to us crewmembers regarding current specific threats in our own aircraft fleets? >> we have been working hard to come from that issue. part of the we do it is with the ffdo group we have a web board now we try to post information that we can and obviously there is an issue with most in class financial information verses unclassified or offical use on the information but i think we have been bringing some of the ceos and the directors of security in for regular intelligence briefings and women of an act leave and we have a different process will work with and i will go back to the tsoc myett averitt to discuss security related event with a benefit for broadcasting that to all of the planes and air.

.. >> lately i've been seeing last minute causing and oversaw situation in first class. is becoming very obvious when the agents are calling people up to the gate and trying to make it not obvious that we have

additional people in first class, but at the same time people are starting to pick up on we have federal air marshals in the aircraft. >> in the last of years we've changed the boarding process for federal air marshals. what she referred to as what we all suffer with come is that we have a very, but we think is a very complex and a good scheduling program. but we are also subject to the same reasons, whether to delay flights, short connections that are unforeseen. we always try to build an ample connection time for the flight. but as we all know sometimes that doesn't work for a variety of reasons. the basic foundation we have for scheduling program, we've had several different external agencies look at bad to see how we can improve it. we think we have a good program. we're always looking to tweak it, but the foundation is we are suffering from the same issues most people are from weather.

mush the delays we're talking about. we didn't instances that are abnormalities to try to work with the carriers and our liaison to try to fix that. but i should be an exception to the rule generally. >> do you mind if i follow up on this? >> your. >> out our special events looked at and scheduled? i mean, sometimes -- [inaudible] honestly d.c. is a pretty common area. sometimes, i mean, how hard it is risk-based going into this idea of special events and how complex cannot get for scheduling purposes? >> it is complex. we work with our partner agencies with regard to scheduling special events, whether it's a national level and then, will recall national special security event. there's a whole government structure to look at the risk involved in that event and what resources are put to that event. so we do work very closely whether it's the fbi, our partners in intelligence community, and within own

leadership team. there's a cordoned effort to look at the special events, what's the level of risk, the level of resources. it is planned out. most special events are not ascribed to us. so i think there's a great deal of forethought put into the level of resources that tsa puts too, not just the federal are marshals service. -- federal air marshal service. >> good morning. bob perkins, einar safety courtney for canada. i want to congratulate all the agencies and members on the panel for the program. expanding into make it easier for the traveling public to access airplanes, both in the u.s. and foreign people, canada included. but i would like to ask, and it's been asked on previous air safety forums in similar venues here, but we still do not have any sort of a cross-border

cooperation with respect to the crewmembers or canadian -- u.s. carriers flying into canadian airports, a similar situation to crewpass or caste or known criminal or any of these things. what's the status of that within the organization. i guess that strikes mostly to -- what is the status within your organization's in coordinating the cross-border type of operation that we can all use and reduce your workload even more? >> that's a great question and it is something that we are working on. i'll tell you that for this year certainly no crew member will continue to be a domestic program with u.s. carriers. pilots and flight attendants of course will be users of that system, of u.s. carriers. as you look at partnerships, we'll talk about canada, for example, since you brought it up, there's some great

initiatives underway across the border right now, particularly with checked baggage screening, some the other pre-clears programs. the partnership with cbp on our site and and canadian customs with things went in with nexus pass that comes under the global entry umbrella. we are making a fair amount of progress, good amount of progress this year on starting to look at how those programs harmonize and similarities between the programs. we have begun some preliminary conversations with industry in some of our foreign partners as the look towards 2013, about comparable levels of security for crew, for employees. one of the things will be looking at in 2013 is probably a process that will allow was to look and shared each other's security programs in sop is to see if there's a way to tie some of those together. but what i was a from the last year is things are starting to look more promising in that direction because some of the partnerships and information without some of the passenger

programs. so it is on the radar. it certainly won't be 2012 i think there's probably an opportunity in 13 to please put a process together, look at harmonizing those standards. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning. i'm the director of alpa structure of security for canada. i'm also the chairman for the ifalpa security committee. and i'd like to direct my question to mr. shea or. with regards to cargo. as you are no doubt aware there are some brand-new icao standards and recommended practices that are coming down the stream with regards to cargo screening. there's three main highlights that we're going to see, for so we'll see a definition, the new definition for what constitutes high-risk cargo. we are also going to see that cargo and mail are not going to be treated equally.

and i think most important for us is the removal of the differentiation between cargo shipped on cargo aircraft and cargo shipped on passenger aircraft. in other words, they're basically going to have to be the same baseline standard. and my question is basically, i know that many states are closer than others worldwide into beating these new standards, recommended practices. my question is how close is the united states system to be able to meet these new starts when they come down the pipe probably in another 12 to 18 months or however long it's going to take icao to run for its process? and what we need to be done in order to meet these new standards? thank you. >> thanks to the question. can you hemi? >> yes. >> so we are looking forward to seamlessly work comes out of icao in the next few months particularly with the meeting for september and high level

security conference coming out is exactly what happened with his papers and proposals that have been developed over the past few months. we are very pleased with the definition of high-risk cargo primarily because of our focus on risk-based screening. we believe it is not the most effective and efficient use of resources to devote the same amount of screening for all cargo. so being able to really identify what is high risk and having a global standard for that i think is a critical first step in the efficacy of our risk-based programs. for the u.s. particular stand on these, i'm afraid that we are not engaged in, how would i say to? intense conversation with the regulators. so the question i would unfortunately have to deflect to poor doug. >> we are working on it. [laughter] >> outstanding. folks on that note i think that

we're out of time, and i very much think the audience for interest and your questions. i also think we are extremely fortunate to have had the participation of our subject matter experts today and our discussion for the need for any application of intelligence driven risk-based measures in aviation security. please join me in thanking all, doug, liz and kerry. [applause] >> this concludes our panel discussion. thanks to all of you for your attention and interest in this very current aviation security topic. for those who're interested, copies of alpa's white paper on risk-based security are at the alpa table. in the exhibit area. think is a very much. greatly appreciate it. >> you are watching c-span2 with politics and public affairs, we case featuring live coverage of the u.s. senate. on weeknights watch key public policy events. every weekend the latest

nonfiction authors and books on booktv. you can see past programs and get our schedules at our website. you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> today at 6 p.m. eastern here on c-span2 tennis champion billie jean king spoke at the national press club earlier this year about exercise, childhood obesity and sports in school. then at 7 p.m. on c-span2, he will talk about his book on libertarianism. >> tonight on c-span2 selected speeches from this year's aids conference. at 8 p.m. eastern, an interview with david brown who covered the conference for the "washington post."

>> credits of the nuclear regulatory commission testified this week at a commission meeting. they said commissioners are too cozy with the nuclear industry resulting in inadequate safety rules. a new head of the nrc, allison macfarlane, chaired the hearing. >> of my. i think first order of the morning is an affirmation vote, and i'm going to ask a net to take it over. >> okay. the first item is on the nuclear project and the commission is being asked to act on a memorandum and order responding to a series of substantial identical petitions that request suspension of final licensing decisions on reactor license applications pending completion of commission action on the remanded ways conference proceedings and seek relief. the commission has voted to approve a memorandum and order which grants the requested relief in part and denies it in part. would you please affirm your

votes? that's all i have, thank you. >> okay. i would invite everybody to the table. all right, so good morning, everyone. i wold like to welcome all our stakeholders, staff, media, members of the public and, of course, our staff who are here for today's meeting. i am pleased to be here for my second commission beating, and over the past month i've been learning an awful lot getting to know my fellow commissioners at the nrc staff as well. and it's a fantastic place. i'm enjoying it very much. today is the eighth commission meeting on the events that took place in fukushima japan on

march 112011. we're going to about the status of action taken in response to lessons learned from fukushima daiichi, including an update on the nrc staff progress in addressing the new term task force's recommendations and other action items. we'll hear about actions from the nuclear industry and perspectives from the public. would any of my commission colleagues like to make any remarks before we begin? no? okay. great. we will turn right now to the panel presentations but we do have a long morning, and i think we're going to take just a heads up will take a five minute break in between the two panels, okay? so we will start with our external panel presentations. every panelist, let me remind you, has 10 minutes. i'm going to keep you to that 10 minutes. sorry. but anyway otherwise we can't

hear from everybody. we will be here all day. so we are going to begin with jim scarola who is the executive director for the u.s. industry focus shimmer response. mr. scarola. >> thank you very much. thank you. i certainly appreciate the invitation this morning, and as representing the industry today, i'll tell you that we continue to value the many opportunities for input to a sure that we get the lessons right as we move forward in implementing the activity coming out of fukushima. in these slides this morning i have a number of things that i have as background, i will go go that background fairly quickly, and move really into the areas going forward that we see as most significance and still to be resolved. starting out on slide number

two, i assume that they will be a. him is that this effort on behalf of the industry has really been unprecedented in our history in terms of the level of collaboration that the industry but all our sectors has worked together, and that has been done through our strategy that we put together called the way forward. the bullets here in front of you really represent our high level goals of that and i would just point out a couple things. first, as we started out this effort there was significant support being provided over two to go at the site at fukushima both from a technical standpoint strategy procedures and equipment. and this was too corny those efforts. we also sent out a call right up front recognizing that this could in itself be a significant distractor to daily operation.

said as a stinky we cannot allow that to distract us from the daily operation at this facility. they should add to safety, not detract from it. we also went about early out invalidating our existing capabilities for both design basis events as well as events that were beyond the design basis, mainly our capabilities around the order that came out following 9/11 under bravo five bravo. and then we continue to assess and provide guidance to the industry on the priority of lessons learned and making sure that we continue to assess lessons learned as more information and facts come about. as you turned over to slide three, these are all the sectors of industry that have been involved from the steering committee. i won't go through those in detail. but our focus has been on timely

execution. we recognize that the analysis of the events in itself does not provide an incremental improvement in safety. it's rather executing and delivering on the results. so our focus has been to prioritize and get actions in place that, in fact, have made change in the level of safety as quickly as possible at all our nuclear plants in the u.s. the next several pages as you go through slide for and slide five for the major competition to date. just emphasizing a couple of those, the bravo five bravo readiness inspections, we out to rent equipment. we ran hoses. we validated the procedures that were in place, and our ability to carry out those actions that were defined following the events of 9/11. we also have gone through periodic maintenance and drills

in using those activities and validated that we have maintenance in place on that equipment. to continue the state of readiness. we also early out as you look to slide five at the bottom of slide five, flex equipment and this is the equipment we defined earlier on the process that would help provide some options to our emergency response organization been dealing with and event that was beyond the current design basis. we look at equipment to it was mainly focused in on the delivery of cooling water and power for the facility. so we developed a subset of equipment that we thought would be important, but yet set up an additional layer of defense, and purchase orders with it for the. the equipment is arriving at all the sites. we have much of the equipment on site already. but is now arriving, and that in

itself provides our emergency response organization another option in terms of defense for beyond design basis events. now, we don't have all the procedures in place on utilization of that equipment, but we still do have very qualified, highly trained individuals in our emergency response organizations that would utilize that equipment is faced with an event o of the magnitude that we saw over in japan. also at the bottom of page five is the industry protocol. and this also has been unprecedented in our past. so this is a protocol document that was signed out by the head of tempo and headed in the high and representing all their sectors in the industry that provides the appropriate guidance for response and responsibilities in an event

that is beyond the current design basis. as we move over to slide six, i start to cover the work that is in progress. and i won't go into any detail on slide six. i will just point o on slide seven that work has started in the emergency operating procedures, the severe accident management guidelines and so on, with the flex equipment. so one of our objective here is that we don't abandon the strategies that were laid out in those emergency procedures. but we complement them with yet another success path as developed by the flex equipment. so that integration is very important work. it is being done by owners group that represent the different technologies that we have in the u.s. sectors to make sure that

there is a level of specificity to deal with each technology as appropriate. we are also, the last bullet on page seven shows that we are continuing to work on organizational lessons. so this week, this past week they issued a doctor on the orders asia lessons out of fukushima. we have been reviewing all the root cause reports that have been published. the japanese diet report, the infant lessons learned, many other societies have put out reports and we continue to review those to look at our current action plan and see if there are gaps that need to be close but i just want to make sure that that i mentioned that because that is a continuing effort of steering committee. remaining issues. i'll highlight a couple here, downstream dam failure. so the industry believes that we need to analyze downstream dams

but we believe that the timing of doing that is, it's appropriate to do at the time that we analyze for a loss of heat. the time is important for make control standpoint. at the actions in place for the walk downs on playing as well as reanalysis now commencing on all the flooding work. and we believe that the downstream dam would be best suited to be coupled with the loss of the ultimate heatsink because that is that is what the objective is. now, while we do that we also recognize that we've got equipment in place under flex that would assist us in being able to deal with downstream dam failures, and as we continue this analysis we would validate that we have the right equipment or whether additional equipment would be necessary. as i move over, you can see the

filtering strategies. i know that you're aware that we continue to have discussions on the right filtering strategies, and we're actively engaged in debt. and then also design basis updates. so let me close out my last minute here with just some focus on what we believe is necessary to deliver on improved safety in the u.s. fleet. first of all we continue to remind ourselves as a steering committee that we cannot look past all the other improvement activities that we have going on. many of them a significant importance such as operator fundamentals, and they cannot take a bakseat to the lessons learned at fukushima uniformly. so we think that the integration very important and continued prioritization. we also recognize that now the activities are hitting the fields. so a lot of the work that's been

done to date has been done by technical specialists throughout the industry. small subsets of experts that were brought together, laid out what work needs to be done. now that work is being integrated with the opry staff at the facilities and more than ever would have to be mindful of the operational focus of those facilities. beliefs go control will continue to be an important aspect as we move forward. we're going to add scope appropriately but we need to recognize and continue to recognize that there is a collective benefit as well as collective burden of the tasks in front of us. so i will finish with just thanking the commission again for the opportunity to have input today, and look forward to our discussions. >> thank you very much. okay, next is casey pfeiffer, who is president of the professional reactor operated society. mr. pfeiffer. >> thank you and good morning.

and again, would like to extend a thanks for inviting us today to talk about our operator issues, and that's pretty much what our presentation is going to be on, is operator issues, the impact that we have seen and the impacts that we see could affect us in the future. to the next slide, slide too, just a quick introduction of prose to process the professional reactor operated society and not only am i the president of prose but also have a reactor operator license at secular nuclear plant, so that's my rigor job. our mission is to serve individual involved with a safe nuclear operations and we're here today to give our feedback and opinions on what we've seen so far from the fukushima recommendations. next slide, slide three. our talk is really, presentation is divided up into two aspects.

the current operator impacts and the future opera impact and concerns. the first and impacts is training. the industry is already with the fukushima recommendations and the crew performance evaluations is already given us more focused training on multiple events. so that's a positive that we've seen that the industry is already gone ahead and done. recommendations 8.1 and 8.4 for emergency operating procedures, severe accident mitigating guidelines and extensive damage mitigating guidelines. will have major effects on operators. this is due to the training time that will have to have in order to become proficient at these procedures. the recommendations 8.1, if you go to the next slide, changing the gop technical guidelines, that will require more training

time and for the operators we already tend normally we qualify five to six years. most of us xns are really counting like on the job training. and stuff that we get the e-mails and operating experience. our training cycles are already very full, packed stuff that we have to require training. i went to training last week and we had, inpo has made our training. we usually have to cover those every couple of years. so our training time with simulator and our operating procedures and our system training time is already very cramped together, and we are, we need to make sure that we do not get so focused on the fukushima recommendations training that it

causes some of our other training to not get as covered as thoroughly as it should. and that's one of our recommendations is that the fukushima recommendations could lead to issues with operator proficiency on a higher probability events. stuff like secondary transients, abnormal operating procedures which could lead to bigger events. so we recommend a balance of training time between the fukushima training and what we have already. next slide, slide five, another positive aspect of the train is that since fukushima and the recommendations is that it is help operators entering discuss the possibility beyond design basis events. we used to talk about when we were doing our drills, and now we more or less incorporate into the train so that's another thing that the industry positive

coming from the recommendations. on the next slide there have been four events since fukushima that is challenge the operators. the tornadoes, the fort calhoun flogged, the north an earthquake and the couple sites lost power. the operators have performed well and also the plants have performed well on these events. these challenging events that to make sure there was no further, you know, degraded accidents from the issues, the tornadoes, that was sequoia that day, and you know, when they lost their off-site power and altogether units tripped, so coy was pretty much the only site that was keeping the created in southeast tennessee from having blackouts. so it was a pretty intense day when you have to go in and out of the abnormal operating procedure tornado warning nine times during the day from 8:00

in the morning until you left that night. the next subject for the current hybrid impacts as the operator staffing plan. recommendation nine states that facility emergency plans address prolonged station blackout. looking at the recommendation nine, it does talk about ep or emergency preparedness but utilities need to a plan to conclude operating and maintenance in that because most of the ep responders are usually first staffing the operational staff, technical staffs, and to have operators and maintenance come into be the ones that actually implement the strategies that are coming from the, the technical committees that come on the emergency preparedness plan. next slide, slide eight, are now the future opera concerns the

equipment cost of the first one, the mandate at fukushima may redirect limited resources away from existing programs, modifications and upgrades by operators. we as operators know that the utilities only have a certain amount of money. they can go beyond what their budgeted for, but we know that there is not a finite source of money for these improvements. and pros is concerned that with the fukushima upgrades that some of this money could be cost, to be taken away from stuff that the operators need to operate their plants safely, and for equipment reliability issues. the next concern, slide nine is the surveillance requirements for new equipment. i know most of this new equipment is not going to be into technical specifications, but it still probably going to have to be tested every once in

while to make sure it is in working condition. and for instance, for the bravo five bravo upgrade at sequoyah i know we have a station blackout generator, and we have a surveillance test on it once per month for the operators were performed at. and i know that, that we probably can't do all the requirements but that's a concern, since the surveillance requirements take time to do and if you get the plant operators out where they are doing surveillance requirements instead of monitoring their equipment, it could be, lead to some burns at the plants. and the last one for opera concerns is the new equipment modifications current effects on current plant design. pros is concerned that the plant modifications and new equipment required to meet the fukushima requirements could cause unanticipated problems for operators. i had a couple examples in my

slides. the next slide that the flood barrier was built around a pump which is important for pumps. and there was no ladder to get over it so the operators couldn't get to files that were required in normal operating procedures or emergency operating procedures. so as pros recommends, when are building some of these new barriers that we need to look at the equipment are rounded to make sure it's not affecting stuff that operators would need to operate during abnormal and emergency operating procedures. and i will conclude your, as operators we are only beginning to see the beginning of the fukushima recommendations, and pros agree to these recommendations will be an improvement for safety margin at u.s. facilities. the current operator impacts our training, which mostly have been positive so far, and operator

staffing, we know that at some plants that, you know, stabbing could be a challenge for operators and events like this. and for future opera concerns, equipment cost, surveillance requirements and modifications that could cause effects on current plant design. and lastly, about our unique perspective from operator standpoint is that we are the people are going to be implementing these procedures, and have to work for us because if they're good on paper here at, the indices basic industries base, but when it comes time for the event to come, if it's not work for us, it could cause the events to be even worse. and just like to conclude, i'd like to thank the invitation again to speak this morning. >> great, thank you very much. that was very informative.

now we're going to hear from chris paine, was the nuclear program director at the natural resources defense council. hi, chris. go ahead. >> thank you for inviting me today. i can't possibly go through my full 56 slide presentation. >> thank you. >> but i encourage you, if you read it, to ask questions about any of the slides during the question session. but i will try, i will be responsive to charge to provide public interest perspective on indices action and stakeholder involvement in response to the fukushima accident. slide four please. we believe that nrc has strayed quite far from the intent of the statutory framework. under the ada, the primary, the atomic energy act, the primary vehicle for takeover involvement is supposed to be for nuclear

safety, it supposed to be the licensing process. in compensation for federal monopoly on regulating nuclear power, the atomic energy act granted states and citizens the right to challenge each and every licensing decision. and citizens safety concerns should be adjudicated in licensing proceedings. but by a steady accretion of exclusionary rules, the nrc is insulated the licensing process for citizen nuclear safety concerns, including fukushima safety concerns. structure discussions and sessions like the present one are now the preferred mode for interacting with the public. there's a large gap in perception between internal and external views of the nrc is to see. i know them, the, you are rented from having attended several of these sessions over the last year is that nrc is the number one rated place to work in the

government. and senior staff rarely fail to convey or have confidence that their efforts represent the best achievable within the currently available resources. that's usually the qualification. so it's always an iffy safety issue is not being dealt with adequate it's because there are not enough resources available. not because the staff or mainstream are doing something wrong. what the public sees in contrast to the interview that the nrc has about its operation is that an ostensibly impartial staff is almost always perfectly aligned with industry's opposition to 100% of safety contentions and citizen proceedings to intervene in licensing proceedings. i doubt that you would find this degree of alignment with industry positions in any other regulatory agency. it is truly astonishing.

do state and public entertainers in the view of the agency really offer nothing of value to the agency? i think if you go back and look at the history of licensing intervention, you'll find many who struggle examples where that's not true. including the basic requirements for emergency core cooling which are merged in licensing proceedings. and in other other proceedings of the atomic energy commission. the public perception of the nrc is of a captive agency. and it cemented by a very high mode of industry protective rules. i'm just -- i want to explain how we perceive these rules because you may not commenting on the inside understand exactly how the public feels about them. fair are highly prejudicial and technical demand contention at mr. dudley standards that the public must meet within 60 days

of a license application being filed. within 60 days you have to go out, gather all their technical support, all your affidavits, and file some heat, very highly restrictive set of standards. pleading standards. these pleading standards don't apply in a civil court where you basically notice pleading. so right there there's an enormous hurdle that citizens don't have to deal with indeed with other agencies and, indeed, with the court. and there's a wide latitude for licensing boards to interpret these pleading standards and to subjectively determine when they have been made. so this is the first mode that public has to contend with if they want to participate in their statutory right. to engage in the licensing process. the agencies need -- slide eight, please -- agencies need to procedures that place burdens

and costs on orders citizens. if you don't understand this procedures i'd be happy to explain in the question and answer session. they differ substantially from other agencies, much more burdensome. the agency depends over relies on simplistic technically erroneous and quickly outdated generic determinations which then made into her for 15 or 20 years. i mean, the generic environmental impact statement on relicensing is a case in point. it's 15 years old. its analysis of alternative energy possibilities for exam is completely obsolete. and there's a problem with unbalanced legal resources, large teams of nrc industry attorneys typically face off in the licensing proceedings against a single intervenor attorney. if the interveners can afford an attorney at all. i don't think this is really the

way the framers of the atomic energy act envisioned this process or because in return for the federal and play that you got to regulate nuclear power, the framers of the atomic energy act really believe that citizens and states would get to participate in this process. and over the last several decades they have gradually been squeezed out, or they require, even new york state is struggling to find a legal resources to do with the licensing. under the current system, industry can literally buy the result, the licensing results it wants. just getting to the starting line, we have just done this in a proceeding, can cost a citizen ended in $100,000 just to get to the starting line, of getting one admitted contention. the path forward through adjudication in the process commission appeals and

ultimately appellate court review is very long and very costly. industry has $400 our attorneys on retainer written off as a business expense to help them navigate and manipulate the process. and as i noted, it is to against one and all is every proceeding. in rc attorneys frequently pile on industry arguments. we know paralyzing pension for paper in this agency. that makes most of its deliberations and proceedings impenetrable but to average citizens and even to ordinary lawyers, and even to the industry itself, and that's what industry has a cadre of specialized lawyers to help it interpret what it is doing. and fukushima response today is required of a consistent with his nrc penchant for turning paper, with noticeable action to increase the safety margin against severe accidents. i just want to deal with one compelling example of why the public sow distrust this agency,

and that's the commission's first official act after the accident to relicense vermont yankee. almost an identical unit to the unit that exploded at fukushima. 10 days after the accident you are relicense vermont yankee. this tone deaf action clearly in my view did not meet the reasonable assurance standard under the iaea. on march 21 this commission could not have possibly known the role, if any, of parent design flaws may have played in the accident. the role, if any that unregulated hardened and or other equipment fears may have played in the accident. so the decent thing to do, in that circumstance would've been to do for relicensing until the post-fukushima safety inspections could be conducted and the relationship between license extension and fukushima

upgrades could have been rationally determined by the agency. on slide 14, the post-fukushima stakeholder involvement state, it would offers little other than opportunity to comment and convey concerns. there's been no meaningful opportunity to adjudicate important fukushima safety issues. and with respect to how the commission industry treats stakeholders it's clear that this memorable phrase, put it, some stakeholder are more equal than others. and exhibit a is the way the order, the mitigation strategies or is completely wrapped around the ndi flex proposal. so i outlined findings, 70 months after the accident, only three of 12 recommended near-term orders have been issued. only two of seven recommended rule makings have been barely

initiated via amp ours. applying the plain tank tables for implementation of upgrades are allegedly to in the comment for all issues. and as a fuzzy and uncertain upgrade with the relicensing process which remains so far unperturbed by the accident. thank you. >> thanks, chris. great. okay, and on to last but serving not least david lochbaum, who is director of the nuclear safety project with the union of concerned scientists. >> thank you and good morning. we appreciate this opportunity to present our views on this important conference. fukushima was not entirely a surprise. instead am is yet another disaster caused by assuming the severity or frequency of hazards would be less than they actually were. when one aims high and mrs., people may still be protected. when one aims low and mrs., he

will pay a steep price. the only surprise is why we continue to aim low. next slide. a hallmark of nuclear safety is defense and depth barriers. but aiming low on everyone of those various sets the stage for a single challenge overwhelming all the barriers, regardless of their number. had fukushima not into low on just one, just one of these five barriers we likely not be here today. slide four, please. so the primary lesson from fukushima is don't aim low. or if one has to aim low, then one has to make sure certain that lower standards to provide adequate protection. in other words, second-guessing after the next disaster should not be easily blamed on bad decision-making today. next slide, please. on hydrogen control buildings going up, must not be the first

workers that hydrogen is collecting in places. yet many buildings in our plans today lacked hydrogen monitoring instrumentation that clearly needs to be fixed. next slide, please your this is a schematic of a reactor. routine airborne releases are filtered by the off-gassing some show in the lower right of the schematic. airborne releases during design basis accidents are filtered by the standby gas treatment system in the upper center. airborne releases doing severe accidents are not filtered as shown in the lower left. so when the hazard is very likely the greatest, we provide the least protection of the public. that's simply unacceptable. next slide, please. there's simply no justification, no reasonable justification to require airborne releases to be held in design basis accidents but to tolerate unfiltered releases during severe accidents. it was wrong before fukushima, it's more wrong now.

next slide, please. this is the indices list of priorities five days into the fukushima disaster. a condition on units one, two and three were far worse than reached at any time during the three-mile i'll ask and get the highest priority of the nrc was the fuel pool. 408 fuel bundles in dry storage at fukushima that they were not even on the nrc's list of priorities. but alone on top of it. we are doing a pitiful job and we have to fix this before the high price for aiming solo. next slide, please. slide 10, please. the spent fuel pool hazard was so dire and so really that desperate measures were taken at fukushima. water was dropped from helicopters and sprayed from water cannons on fire trucks below. one did not need water pistols

or fams for the much lower hazard of dry cask storage at fukushima. there's a lesson here. if for only open our eyes and our minds. next slide, please. slide 12, please. >> the nic may share some of the guilt and the federal government's failure to provide a repository for spent fuel more than 50 years after the first civilian nuclear power plant began producing it. allowing that to continue and expose millions of americans to unnecessary elevated risks is unacceptable and must be fixed. next slide, please. this is a picture of some of the dry cast at fukushima after the tsunami. they did not get much tv coverage or twitter time because they pose almost zero threat to anyone at anytime. shame on us if we continue to store fuel and overcrowd spent fuel pools rather than in safer and more secure dry storage. next slide, please. i'm making a formal allegation

under the nrc's allocation program that the pilgrim nuclear plant in massachusetts and the cooper nuclear plant in nebraska did not comply with federal safety regulations and general design criteria and 44 of our 50.49 because the safety related cooling system for the reactor buildings cannot handle the decay heat load in the spent fuel pools following a design basis accident at this is not a beyond design basis problem. it is a problem right here right now. these are safety violations that must be fixed. next slide, please. the nrc is really setting the stage for a nuclear -- it capsized while tied to the dock in chicago killing more passengers than died on the titanic. the eastman capsize largely due to the way of life both added per federal law after the titanic disaster. the nse proposes to rely on high-volume water sprays or make up to spent fuel pools as a last resort.

let's not replace a nuclear disaster caused by natural tsunami with one caused by human made tsunami. next slide, please. records obtained under the freedom of information act reveal that the nrc went to great lengths to ensure that its staff going to japan have potassium iodide, even though their workstations were more than 10 miles away from the stricken site. americans deserve that same protection and consideration. next slide, please. last year millstone millstone and took him each experienced operator mistakes during routine plant operations. those mistakes cost the operators to literally lose control of the reactor cores power levels. it's aiming very low to assume that operator performance will magically be better under the stress of severe accidents, while the implement so -- seldom seen procedures next slide, please. we must aim higher by requiring formal nse evaluation procedures

and average proficiencies in using the. i've heard many people say that the fuel operators currently required already have too much on the plates and would be distracted by their focus on making money for plant operators to if so, the outburst, the owners can use some of those profits to our more operators so that there'll be some folks in the control rooms trained to protect the public doing severe accidents. next slide, please. we learn from the freedom of information act documents that many state officials queried the nuclear repertory commission falling to 50-mile evacuation recommendation. the nse would publicly second-guess protective action measures called for by the governors. next slide, please. that question seems valid. we hope that its answer is not that the nrc will remain silent when it disagrees with measures been taken to protect the public.

we recommend that the biannual emergency exercises periodically include the nse pretending or disagreement with the states protective action measures to test of such differences would be reconciled. thank you. >> great, thank you, david. got us ahead of time. thank you all very much for your presentation. we really appreciate the input. we are going to start off with questions from the commission for and we'll start off with commissioner austin toros. koch you drinking, build. >> thank you, chairman. into all for being here today. i think this is a good example of hearing. very different perspective depend upon the or session that one comes and represents i think that's very healthy for us to hear very diverse views and different perspectives, so thank you for your candor and your remarks. i'm going to start out with jim and ask a question i want to ask everybody else to provide a response as you desire. the fukushima task force report

90 days report under dr. miller came out july of 20 olympic ready commission meeting here i think july 21 of 2011, or close to the. so it's been a little over a year since the report came out. jim, you've noted the lessons learned of the sequence of events it came out i think in november 2011. anss, the japanese diet report that came out of recently, so the question i had for you, and others please respond as well, what's the biggest take away you have over the last 12 months based on any new information that's come out subsequent to the original near-term task force report? any big surprise? aha moment kind of thing? >> thank you for the question. i can't tell you that it would be a big surprise but i think come off like previous events

whether within our industry or outside our industry, initially the information that comes out is usually focused in on the hardware and the technical aspect. and what i find is that the broader lessons already the organizational lessons. and i think we're seeing the same thing out as we start to understand a little bit further with the dynamics were for that country, as well as for the decision-makers through that event. i believe that our approach has been validated by some of the later analysis that has been done, including the japanese diet report where it points to some of the strength that we put in place over the years here in the united states that is put in place over there would have benefited them. so at the highest level for me is operating dollars and operator fundamentals. my takeaways is that we continue to restrict our thinking with

our ability to predict what nature might throw to us. and why we need to do that in our basic designs fundamentally the knowledge that we have at the training that we provide to our emergency response organizations is the differentiator that i think giving them more options for response with equipment, such as what we're doing with flex and their knowledge will be the ultimate success that spent anything you want to add? >> i don't have anything to add. >> i think we've learned more about, and they're some of arming parallels really with some things that have happened here. japan began its reevaluation of seismic hazards in 1979. they had three separate cycles of study cycling upgrades, japanese plants. and yet they failed to implement most of those, the implications

of those analyses. the emergency diesel placement in the basement of the turbine building, that was noticed by safety regulators but it wasn't implemented. and you can go on and on with characteristics of the fukushima diet cheap land and other japanese plants with a japanese notice problems and issues but didn't act because the relationship between the regulator and industry was such that they didn't really have the power to act. they may have had on paper power but culturally and within the system they didn't act. and i see a lot of that kind of restraint here. i see a lot of studies constantly evaluating issues, like the seismic hardness question but i don't see the changes in years. and even after fukushima we have now, a very attenuated seismic

reevaluation process. that's not going to produce any changes in plans until sometime in the next decade spent let me as you a question, chris, if i can get you back on response. with respect to the orders and requests for information that the innocent they should in march of this year, specifically the seismic and flooding evaluations, the seismic and flooding lockdowns, are there particular comments at that nrc has provided as part of the public feeding process? or to our staff that has changes that you would recommend? >> we did provide those last october, and i believe they were ignored. we thought that, and i think commissioner got into this on one of the sessions. we recommended that the seismically induced flood and fire hazards be integrated within those walk downs and within the seismic reevaluation. i mean, why defer the issue to a

pr a that won't be done for eight years? i mean, it just doesn't make sense. i mean, sure you're not going to understand every possible chain of events that might occur without doing a peek at a but certain by doing a walk through if you're focused on the issue or you're going to notice some of the interactions between say the fire protection system and safety related electrical components. and you're going to do something about that. >> the broader question to you in response to that? >> i think the inpo report lasted of the commission size as kind of the baseline, provided some the answers, questions i asked but didn't of entity. how difficult it was for the workers to governments on the measures that were taken. i knew that the earthquake and tsunami caused some infrastructure damage at the site. i did know the extent of it until i read the inpo report to expand why certain things took so long. and i think the lesson here is we can have a good time as to how long it takes for workers to

go to a to b., but if those are developed on saturdays, sunshine days as opposed to the worst case, then things may take much longer. ..

and your colleagues who also offered. do they have vehicles were what to express these concerns and i'm sure we optimize the outcome for training so there's a proper balance? >> i think for some of the issues we have the right vehicle but we are probably blocking on matt. probably depending on what the issue is on the training depending on how we would get resolved so i would say for some issues we do have the right avenue to do it to get them worked out but for others, probably not be an estimate by encourage you to engage i remember when i was an active duty 67 submarine when the submarine force installed the

casualty modifications on the class submarines to a number of years to install these modifications and there were some glitches that occurred in that time period and no change like this will ever be without some times of frogs and turtles. >> if i can turn to you to your spent fuel pool comments. do you think you are aware the officer research spent fuel pool scoping study and what is trying to achieve do you feel like the commission should make a decision on the pools more quickly prior to that study coming out? do you think the commission has all the information it needs right now to make that? you're slide is certainly ahead of that. >> if you get the actions the commitment has taken since even before 9/11 come after 9/11 the orders that went out our triage.

spent fuel pool second, trysail passed later. if you look at the new guidance that went out, the inspectors were tasked with looking at the reactive pooling and spent fuel pool cooling not to look at dry cask. if you look at the orders issued earlier this year the task force report include specific recommendations to protect the reactor core and spent fuel pool. there isn't one word about the storage. the staff knows dry storage is safer and more secure than the polls. we need to do it. if we don't, if you don't know the answer, if that is the honest decision we don't understand how you can keep approving applications to increase the storage capacity pools. if you don't know whether they are safer not how could you make that decision? so we think you know enough to make those decisions you also know enough where the stuff needs to be today. >> thanks. >> thank you, bill. it's my turn next and i have a

bunch of questions we will see how far it goes. let me start this way and start with dave and pick up the spent fuel pool issue i know i've read some industry writing that critiques the idea of moving spent fuel into dry cast at an accelerated rate because of work exposures. what's your reaction? >> they've got a shorter outages which is done by moving fuel from the course of the spent fuel pool sooner than it used to be. there are doses with that activity that didn't bother the industry one iota when it happened. more important, the licensee requested a plan that was approved to transfer fuel to unit two, then put in because they don't what to spend the money to upgrade the maturity. the increased worker for that

activity the worker does this on concern to the owners. when they want to stop spending money like putting more fuel all of a sudden the worker doses has become an issue but until they are consistent across the border and how they treat them on their safety i'm going to remain not skeptical opposed for that nonsense. >> let me turn to chris. first of all let me assure you that i find the critiques you have to offer to be very valuable. if you didn't have the intervenors and critiques so i appreciate all your input and i do share your concern about making the documents more transparent and accessible one of my goals for the agency. so hopefully you will see some changes there.

but let me go to a question for you and that has to do with the slides you didn't get and just as an issue that we are thinking about your thye would like to hear your view you made the case for using them, but there's always pluses and minuses so what are some of the drawbacks cracks stomach i'm not a filtered expert by any means. i arrived at those conclusions by examining what other countries of done, and the conviction that a risk in form approach is something like the problem of preventing a serious accident all of the european regulators took a deterministic

approach. this was a risk that needed to be mitigated. if you look at the first plant is back in sweden across the channel from copenhagen. was almost a political impossibility not to do it. i guess the risk was filtered vince. the concern -- i don't know if it is a risk or not that is an engineering question is going to have a very large containment and for the high capacity which i think is what is needed you've got to go beyond the 8-inch diameter parts of the reliable because i deal with this issue in detail in my slides i don't want to repeat it all here but basically the thinking behind filtered events is in the case of a severe accident you need to provide yourself with the most

options, and not being able to early when people are still in the dpc would you need to do where you can get one hydrogen production and a matter of -- we are talking hundreds of kilograms of production in a matter of minutes in such a fast-moving accident to do need that prompted capability and needs to be sheltered because the folks are not going to be out. >> let me move to casey. i would like you to weigh in on this issue, too and this is something david brought up at the end of his remarks or sometime in his remarks but it seems like we be getting more operators might be some of your concern. what is your attitude towards that, with adding more operators

held? >> i think some plants are short staffed and i think that adding operators would help the planned staff. >> i don't disagree. when you talk about the operating staff we will add operators when it's appropriate. we will in the past and have in the future. i don't think that is the question. we have to get through the analysis to determine what is necessary in terms of staffing. we are still in the strategy standpoint of developing the appropriate procedures. when we have the procedures and we understand what it takes to be proficient in execution and it goes beyond operators it may not just the operators utter executing these procedures that may be security officer scott are proficient to execute our plan we will set up accordingly to do that and we have in the past so i don't think there is a

hesitation there. the only other thing i would say is the staffing me not be the bottleneck it may end up being simulators it may end up being modeling on the simulators around 24 hours seven days a week to support the proficiency that we see right now on the design basis, so we've got to understand if there is a proficiency need it that is through the operators where that fits an appropriately, and i think the actions that have been propagated right now will get us to that point. >> i would also like to add for duffield operators it wouldn't take take a long time to add them, but for a license operators it is at least a three-year process from when they hire and before they could even get their record operator licensed. i graduated in chemical engineering and put my

bachelor's of science and getting an nrc license was almost as difficult as that with all the information you have to have to pass the stimulator and written test so it's not just saying we need more operators and we agree with that but to get them is a little more difficult. schenectady's it did you want to jump in on that at all? >> the point the industry struggles with office and required is a voluntary initiative some will and some won't. the specter of results that we've seen today. in my two minutes with me jump to this issue we might have to take it up again but he mentioned the approach i would

like to learn a lot more. one thing i anderson, correct me if i'm wrong is the flex approach that you are thinking about one facility for the entire east coast we started out with each unit having a set of equipment so in operation today we will have equipment on their site but it goes beyond the current design requirements to be able to deal with an extreme event. to wear a responsibility of side that point to deliver equipment additional equipment that's necessary we have proposals right now that have been submitted to the industry and evaluating the proposals some are forcing the locations summer for multiple locations about

five locations we have to decide the the right approach is yet there are benefits and drawbacks on both sides the focus that we have is the timeliness of that response and the ability to have the timing is requires additional facilities will put additional facilities in place we don't find it credible. we don't think it is a safe implementation of the task force report and its recommendations the task force recommended a severe accident mitigation be brought under the oversight program and will be formally regulated that is the antithesis of what is occurring there is no determination as the task force recommended on the minimum times

for the extended 72 our coping time both are variables now that are running free they will not receive the future action and here we are 17 months after the accident why would think that extending and creating a minimum baseline is a no-brainer for the agency but i have a different view apparently the senior staff has a different view and the self powering options should be studied. and i have seen no intention why the agency of the emergency turbine pumps you can put a permanent magnet motor and extend the time for not eight hours, but a week as long as you have the ability to run the times will have electricity to run the false and the speed

controls it will be mandated by the agency rather than letting everybody system under this. now i think it is commissioner smith. >> thank you. i want to join in thinking each of you for your presentations and i know also that you and your organizations have been very involved at this point many of the dozens of meetings that the staff has held and i am very appreciative of your sustained engagement there's a tremendous amount of effort and activity that your organizations have to support, so i appreciate you consistently participating in that any sustained basis. our colleagues have covered some areas i might have asked about and have also asked questions. i have a few clarifying questions from the presentation to give in and then maybe a couple things to pick up on either questions that were asked

or answers given already. jim, i wanted to start out at your slide had talked about the fact that the equipment readiness has been affirmed by infection, and of course there were lockdowns of this equipment in the early months after the fukushima defense. some sites were the site of the equipment. readiness was actually found to be challenged in some way that things were not where they had been in the condition to be utilized for the means intended so we have gone through this process of walking down office equipment again and free astana wishing. what would you say in terms of any kind of assurance or ability to rely upon this and if we had any equipment what is the approach to making sure that we don't see the same kind of again over time stuff if it isn't

perfectly fixed or isn't found in the same condition how do you respond to that process going forward? >> i think that is one of the lessons we have when we look back at our implementation associated with that is that we did not establish in many cases the appropriate ongoing maintenance program. if you look there is one of the bullets we have is putting in place even with all the flux equipment putting in the program that maintains the equipment and actually surveils the equipment so that is the key is we were shortsighted certainly with the equipment. this efficiencies that we did identify and a walk down have been corrected at all the stations. >> and it's through this process that you're putting in place if what would give you the assurance you wouldn't have that same incident occurring in the

future that casey was mentioning as a concern as far as who is going to do all of that? >> yes. they are one in the same. the programs would be consistent with what we had in our design base equipment we would run that periodically and surveil that periodically, and the operators are involved in that. i wouldn't say that it's operated alone. it will extend beyond that because the maintenance of that equipment involves our maintenance personnel and in many cases where the equipment is located in a remote area, regional centers we will actually have a service that will provide that and we are to establishing the requirements for them to periodically test their capabilities and not just the equipment. is it possible the equipment is put in place the procedural aspects of this are addressed and enshrine and trained.

how specific can get on the effective coping time and analytics and evaluations the you can do i guess the question sometimes becomes like how many decimal places, how sure can you get about enhancements to coping time in terms of the strategy >> it all depends on the base assumptions you start with. from the fundamental standpoint to the loss of the power of the site is usually our starting point for what we look at and coping times and we are looking at the times on batteries. we can go through and we do have specific calculations the lookout for a capacity of the batteries under a normal configuration is. there are additional actions that can be taken if diagnosed early that you are in a specific event to offload loads on those

batteries to allow the batteries to last a long were. of time so we can get very specific from a calculation standpoint and then it is a matter of what is the appropriate margin on that specificity. >> i think my question might to the further the period of time not being immediate purpose of flux is it not to have and enhancing effect on the coping time my question is how specific can you get about that enhancement and how much reliance can you have on a plea for word it's been to have to be fairly broad range. >> i think this enhancement to the coping time we see many of these strategies are in different because of the capacity after the initial hook up and after the initial fuel sources are depleted we will have the regional response centers capable of providing the additional time.

so we don't see on the back end once we have the strategy in place and hooked up that we see a limit to the time period. it will depend on what is the infrastructure in place for around that plant at the time how can we get additional fuel to the site visit by flying in tanks there are things there but we don't see those as obstacles that we can overcome with via regional capacities. >> i wanted to touch on you had a couple of examples of how occasionally the plant modifications are made and it is done in a way that is not helpful to the operator actions they might have to take. do you have a sense it would seem to me i don't know that the processor we haven't put to the plant modifications but i would think that operators as part of an operations department or certainly engineering where are the opportunities to provide

input to those kinds of plant modifications as operators prior to their being implemented and can you give me a sense to give two examples is this widespread concern or for those other noteworthy examples you were using to point out the significance of operators have an input to this process? >> the two examples are just the examples we have found with the flex any to have in the back of our mind that is not clear to affect the plant a crop in the operators may have to manipulate on other accidents when. we do have some input to the design changes but probably not as much as some operators would

like to read if there is a design change we don't find out about it until this towards the final implementation involved as it is going in in which we should be involved as it is being placed into the plant to make sure to the issues for possible issues led to vetting equipment that we need to manipulate the during other accidents or other conditions. >> can i add to that question? it reminds to the evaluations done for the safety modifications and security modifications we petioned the interface between the two the design visas modifications are done with a very detailed robust review for these kind of things but the initiatives are done with a different view each

robust, but the potential to our intuitive are not being flushed out. if you agree then you are much more likely to catch those things. spec i appreciate you mentioning that differentiation for the level of mean gfe committee engineering of regional analysis, and i wanted to ask -- i only have a minute now i was going to ask the entire panel to build off of commissioner's question about looking at the evaluations that have been done since that even in fukushima and were there any surprise moment or anything like that. i would want to ask a question from a slightly different angle which is they continue to participate in a lot of international discussions and what they call extraordinary meetings on the events where i think we have an opportunity to advocate for specific evaluations for information to be done either by the international groups to bring further information about both the event itself and how it was

responded to the various countries can have access to some of these evaluations and use them in their own national response to this. is there any of these areas where important questions that maybe not have yet been evaluated that the nrc as they participate in these that we could be saying more important things to be evaluated going forward that we would like to have answered for ourselves and i know i'm slightly over my time but just quickly if you have some thoughts you want to share on that. >> we think there's another sycophant discrepancy in the question of hydrogen management and hydrogen control and navigation between european regulators and the nrc and those discrepancies are not explained or understood at least in the u.s. context, and for example, current computer models don't

adequately protect hydrogen production and european severe accident experiments, but i can be they from the late to the mid 80's. so this whole question of differential protection, european and russian reactors are loaded down with the igniters and u.s. reactors generally are not, and what does this mean about this issue? so, that's 1i think reconciling hydrogen mitigation control standards globally, and understand and like other countries take the issue more seriously than we apparently do is important. the everything is funding. the current iaea efforts on the nuclear safety in the u.s. contributions i believe our at 500,000 with another 700,000 may

be that might be provided where other countries like japan are kicking in tens of millions. so the u.s. financial contribution in the effort is pathetic at this point. >> thank you. >> why he alluded to the issue of instrumentation of a bloody war on availability is a bigger issue. they struggled with what was the level and the various pressures. in this country we've done a good job with level after trademark ninth we have lessons to be learned from the other instrumentation the key parameters that we need to continue monitoring. >> thank you. >> to me i would turn to the infrastructure. so it's not the specific issue and how that gets at it and i think that we can once we get the issue to the table. but the infrastructure that is set up i think is what is most important. the forums like what we have today i don't think our present in the international community. so, when i look at full-time on-site independent inspectors to have free range to go look at

the systems, deficit safety systems, readiness, 24 hours a day seven days a week, that isn't common in the international community. when i look at continuously evaluating things like our design basis reviews that have been conducted either through the sffi in the past, that infrastructure needs to be recognized and the value of that and what it means for a true safety i still think needs to get the attention of the international community. >> thank you, madam chairman. >> thank you very much. on to the commissioner. >> thankthank you. i found with the views expressed this morning very interesting i read the letter through nei dated june 8 of this year where

it says the tier one items were not completed will achieve as much as 90% of the safety benefit from the recommendations come end of quote. in another place it says the implementation of the tier one items might address 23 portilla two. e question to you is do you agree and if so, how do you know it's 90%. >> i cannot give a precise number. but i do agree that each of these issues has overlapping benefits and i think that is the point of that letter is that we need to understand that overlapping benefit before we commission new activities. so when i think about things like our discussion venting her, filtering, many of the actions we are taking and promulgating

are set up to prevent us to litigate getting to that point entirely. and i think collectively we need to understand that we can discuss an issue in its own silo. and we can come to a conclusion that that issue has merit and benefit. but unless that issue is put in the perspective of all the other activities that are going on, i think we can miss appropriately give an issue priority for this industry that is not appropriate. ..

tier two and three, maybe push them far into the future because 90% of the benefit we have already received. 90% to 85%. >> to respond to that. first it was for the industry is not backing off one bit on getting lessons learned. the industry has been advancing the lessons learned here, even the latest report put out is the industry has led getting to the organizational lessons. we understand the value of that, but we also believe that it continues to be extremely important as leaders in this industry to prioritize, so that we don't inappropriately displace the focus of our operating facilities.

>> and i'm glad to hear that. now moving on, you just mentioned organizational lessons and coming to flex, the ac rs wrote a letter of last july 19, quote, by its nature, the flex program will require a substantial on-site and outside mobilization of resources under unusual challenging conditions. the question is, do we understand what can go wrong under these unusual and challenging conditions, or are we assuming they guess it will be transformative and everything will be fine? what can go by what are the consequences of that going wrong? to be of an understanding of that? the magazine to give a definition, clearly we can't

give it that specificity, but we can have ranges of external events that we know we have to cope and deliver upon. placement of where that equipment is located on site is getting that consideration. so where do we place that additional equipment. we have multiple sets of that we are not pleasing at all and when locution. then the mobilization from off site is part of what we will value rate in staffing studies. what is the requires response time and what are the ways in which we can get additional support to that station? >> i understand that. my question is in pursuing to do these things, i mean, things may go abroad. we don't know what the context will be. maybe followed by a flood or fire, could it be a hurricane? what puzzles me as we take a

small number, independently of these things and we beat it to death. the operators can do this and that and here we are talking about a massive operation in saying what make sure it works, you know, and that's equipment having planes, helicopters. it seems to me the level of attention is not the same. i would expect to see some scenarios that will say yes were trying to transport hereunder and these are the different conditions we may encounter that we make should be made. i don't see that. it's a very high level with all this time waving, but all this time waving an argument that will work.

>> well, let me start out by saying the design base equipment is very specific. very specific to the event and they go to detail and it is our best minds in capability by design base equipment. we took under flex to say what if we can predict nature, how do we have more option analogy available to our trained and intelligent emergency response organizations. sirkin h. o. you really thought through every scenario that i can tell you is that result we have added more success pats that may survive an unplanned event in nature on the extreme ends and that is what our purpose is. multiple locations, both on-site, multiple regional

centers and a level of collaboration in this country unprecedented in this industry should be a leather trench neighbor and say i need this, can you get it to me? >> i'm very pleased to hear. i just think you should take the extra step. >> i accept your challenge. >> mr. paine, i received your slides yesterday and i must say i was greatly disturbed about your views of this agency. i will try to understand better your complaints and i will talk to my stephanie enters the staff to clarify a few things. but in that effort of clarification, i'm wondering, do you have an example of where you

are pleased with the nrc acted so we can learn from the? >> we were very pleased with the agencies near-term response to a cushy mat. >> a 90 day report? >> they took to do the accident. we were pleasantly surprised them by the integrity, the way the anti-tnf recommendations interlock and create a real path forward for dealing with these problems. part of our disappointment is that report and the logic of its structure was immediately disassembled and parcel about an islamist the interlocking nature of the recommendations has been lost. for example, there was a reason the task force but it has one.

if you create an extended design basis for severe events are not quiet and seemed to last the first lesson of the fukushima was yes. you regulate away the design basis advance. the agencies completely lost that approach. >> but you are aware of course our stuff is working on recommendation one and they will come back in february. >> in the meantime, all the centerpiece no correctives are going forward and the whole point was if you have a framework to guide it, everything from a quality control criteria in the rags and part 52 considering how the various stages of your process to either reinforce or undermine each other, this whole question of coping time, now we seem to be talking about investing money

in the downstream portions of the process rather than in the near-term problem, which would alleviate resorting to the downstream process by extending the plan's initial coping capability. they have a separate recommendation on that. as far as i can see us just disappeared. >> i'm not sure it disappeared. your point is well made. thank you very much. >> okay. commissioner magwood. >> thank you, mr. chairman. given the subject today, it's interesting to reflect on my visit with commissioner eidson dorf back in january and recall the staging area for one goes through before going on site in the campus for a chat me soccer

team trained to college a village. it's a tribute to the soccer team to address a fire in the olympics and had wished him well as for the not the factor of three sinuous women coming soon for the finals. i hope they enjoyed their supermodel. [laughter] welcome all the speakers. i think you've done a fantastic job. it's been an excellent session. it is the first time i think mr. paine has joined the commission and discussion since i've been here. i don't think you've been at the table when i was here. i don't remember you being here. it's how you manage to 56 size to present to us today. i join commissioner lochbaum.

something i have heard from affirmative stakeholders and my colleagues about, you know, i invite you if you do have some specific temples, but specific to those who would recommend if we can better accommodate to talk to you about it more to see if there's some path forwards we could consider. i also agree, by the way, if you're paralyzing potential for paper, you should see my desk right now. there is a lot of paper, but i'm afraid it's the nature of the business. i recognize that can be a barrier and is one i think we do try to deal with. >> there's probably things you can do. the way, for example, the decisions were made to move forward, the orders issued were very broad brush. i mean come is so broad brush is

impossible to determine e meeting. then you have draft guidance that comes out and the draft guidance is basically references industry documents, industry written documents. that is three sets of documents for any citizen to actually understand what you're required to do and which are asking of the industry. at the end of the day, you need to write regulatory requirements that are clear and pretty self-contained because this chain of documents because every time the nrc says everything tommy noticed staff publishes a list of reference is that it can go on for two pages. i mean common set of stating what it is commonly see the references on which it's based. i think that whole culture of just throwing every documents into the tank to make sure you've covered your base is

inappropriate. it's not the way to regulate and i hope it changes. >> i invite you for more discussion on some of these issues. mr. lochbaum, in your comments he made and i think you said a formal allegation a couple beers. have you submitted something formally or assist first-time? >> this is the first time. >> the chairman just assured that issue is firmly picked up at the agency in the meeting records can reflect the commission interest in seeing this follow-through. so make sure that could stop it. you also made a very interesting comment regarding the ability of operators to respond in the event of an emergency under adverse conditions. i do recall reading the timeline when it's going to the issues when the operators of fukushima were facing darkness, smoke,

damaged equipment. i think that is a concern. that's not so much a question for you, but more a question for mr. pfeiffer. what is your response to that? how do operators -- how were operators train out to do with adverse conditions? have you ever been trained to deal with an environment filled with smoke when the lights are off and i might be a fire nearby? have you been through training of that nature? >> i would have something to her simulator is a co-author to go out. we do have most of our control rooms of emergency backup supply laser batteries so we would be in total dark as its offense for at least a wireless events were to have been, but we have started being trained in darkness at sequoia. i don't know about the other people in the other industries

are there facilities. we've never been trained in smoke. we are qualified every year. i can probably say -- i don't know if anyone has ever actually done a simulator session with the cba, self breathing apparatus like they did at fukushima. >> you know, i've talked with operators, plant staff contacted them about emergency procedures and many of them are expected to go to different locations in the plan disconnect and reconnect piping, not in significant activities. turn valves, climb ladders, things they have to do under certain circumstances. and if these actions need to be taken in an environment where there may be a fire nearby, maybe a collapsed wall, smoke, all arms, who knows what going

on, does she feel that if something operators should experience before being expected to implement? as mr. lochbaum the same committee's complex procedures? >> i was a lot of places in the field that operators manipulate stats, this latter sense sliders instead staged that are specific for that equipment, so they don't have to go to a latter station that may be across the room. this equipment right there at the place they need to manipulate. >> my only thing would be i don't know how you stimulate that. you'd have to build some pain that would simulate a fire or simulates smoke. >> first responders do it all the time. we at facilities across the

country. in fact, i visited one recently at texas a&m university disaster city, where they have simulate a collapsed building, where they have to smoke in the alarms in your hippy screaming people. why don't we do that? >> that can be something we could bring up. >> dave, looks like you want to jump in. >> i was an observer doing a joke conducted an honest with the team going out to six and the room was -- it had been the condition, none of the people have flashlight. when i pointed it out, they were all bigger than me and they went back to get their flashlights. i used to teach him a simulator for you guys. you stimulate in the control room operator sure spends and lots of lights and things like that, but many activities in the field you don't simulate because you don't have that simulated. you can test part, but not all in the chain is only as strong

as its weakest link. bakery with kc, it's difficult to artificially subject the operators to that stress in training, but the extent that we can benefits everybody. >> i just want high-temperature environments. >> you currently trainer fire brigades in the matter much to talk about, where we actually have facilities that go into the real situations, real smoke situations? part of the lessons coming out of the latest report by looking at decision-making under stress conditions and we are picking that up as an industry to go look at those situations to say okay, what more can we be doing from where we are today? >> i appreciate that. time goes by quickly when you ask these questions, but it does seem to name that when you consider the lessons learned after 9/11, when you look in the first responders are now doing in their training in the rescue

operations, especially after reading the first time i come it's hard to see the distinction between what an operator might need to do under certain circumstances and what a fire brigade might need to do. and commissioner ostendorff has explained in some of his training as a naval officer, sometimes are expected to do very complex things in adverse conditions. if you haven't experienced it before come it's difficult to know how well your carrier your duties the first time you're in a fire, the first time you're in a smoke filled environment. i do think this is something that we on the regulatory side and also in the industry side need to take very seriously. i think dave raised an interesting point. my time is that.

>> well, i think this has been a very productive session and we would all benefit from more informal conversations with all of you. but let me add sure and ask for just five minute break while we switch panels and everybody can get a 10 stretch their legs. thank you. match. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the question that president reagan when the president was jimmy carter in 1985, read

better off than we were four years ago? people urged me to say that we should ask again. i disagree. the question right now is to chew expect to be better off than three and has come for years the president obama quite certain she think things would be different than they are now? it plays on the expectations, on the concern, the disappointment that americans feel. sitting right at 47%, the sports analogy as the bracket for the basketball under 65 and 66, he'd be right on the bubble, but very cute that, 47% is a precarious decision. and as you know, this is not an election you hear about in texas, california or new york.

this is iowa and north carolina, virginia, ohio. these are the 10 states. president obama job numbers are underwater and there is a net negative in the state. but here is the key. the key is not just where he is in terms of job approval. two things, number one, where he is in terms of the intensity of disapproval. more voters disapprove than approve and that drives turnout against him. secondly, it is the direction of the approval rating. the numbers from a year ago, president obama was much more a year ago than he is now. it is headed his way little bit. he's got momentum, even though these numbers are pretty negative. >> you can see the entire event from republican pollster neil newhouse and peter hart tonight on c-span at 8:00 eastern.

>> the chief executive of otter makers for no one nissan says the euro zone will survive, but the next few years will be tough for the european economy. the power stores carlos ghosn spoke at a breakfast in new york city. [inaudible conversations] >> yeah, i'd love some coffee. i'm a thank you all for coming back to the viewpoints breakfast. it's great to see so many distinguished new yorkers going to get up at this early hour in the morning, so thank you for coming. i want to thank carlos ghosn, what a are icons of the business community for being our guest this morning and of course i want to thank our wonderful sponsors, idsa business school

in the boston consulting group for their continued support of this event and will give the opening where to hide via the scat of pcg. >> so, good morning. i am a partner in managing drag pcg. as the dark detroit office and our global reflect the spirit as you can hear from the way i speak i am more from the top than i am from detroit. so i welcome all of co2 does "wall street journal" viewpoint and i'm happy to welcome carlos ghosn from the renowned alliance to be with us today. bcg is proud to sponsor this story spoke on the east coast and west coast to make done that since its beginning in 2008 in new york and in 2010 on the west coast. i would like to take the opportunity to thank our

cosponsor, ioc, for being with us in this series in new york. i don't want to spend the next few minutes giving you a list of the accomplishments, which you are all very familiar with, but i'd like to give you maybe a few traits of his personality. and the first thing i'd like to say is probably the most american of the japanese business theaters. he succeeded to be nicknamed mr. mr. 711 for the hours he spent in the office, but he's the only foreigner who was the hero for japanese manga, which is the equivalent of our marvel comics. for this i believe is the only real equivalent of captain america. he is also very competitive and i'm not sure that carlos remember that.

we first met in 1997 in paris when he was about to make a speech at a conference where bill gates was the lead speaker. i am sure that he needs carlos decided to become as famous as the built. it was after 2003, when he was voted man of the year after the stunning turnaround at nissan. he then collected recognition all around the world and just last year, cnbc listed carlos ghosn as the business leader of the year. i don't know how many of you know, but if you take we know, nissan and the russian side that the alliance, one car out of 10 sold in the world today are produced by nissan alliance. if we look at the u.s. in the

past few years come in the gained 2% market share and is now about 80% of the u.s. market. also, i think for someone who travels across continents several times a month and his corporate jet, i think carlos has no range anxiety. you probably know the nissan leaf is the first zero emission car produced in the world. carlos himself forecast about 10% of the group sales in the decade will be made with electric cars and so far i'm in the group as an investment of $4 billion investment around electric cars, which means that clearly he has no anxiety about the future of this technology. last thing you probably all know that, but carlos is very smart. in 1990, when he was the ceo of michelin, he acquired a good

rich into michelin north america. it was very successful and i think he decided never it again. when confronted with nissan in 1999, he made sure he did not fully integrated so that he could be the ceo of three companies. reno in paris, nissan in tokyo and every note nissan, congratulations that's very smart. and without further ado, let me hand off to alan murry, editor online at "the wall street journal," who will lead today's discussion. >> javier, thank you. in thank you, carlos for being here. [applause] >> i think we should start with that because there is really know what in the world who has been as big a proponent of electric cars as you have. you approach your money where your mouth is, invested billions

of dollars ramping up something like 11 factories in eight different countries to produce electric cars. wired magazine said last year you were a very brilliant visionary or you are crazy if they would. which is at? why electric cars? >> every time you face a challenge, you are always considered somebody who is a visionary. frankly these kinds of statements that had throughout my career. last i had them when they made the alliance. just read the headline including yours in 1999. this kind of stayed that way god made two meals do not make a worse race. we got, you know, if you're four, $5 billion you want to throw them in the ocean, better than put them in nissan. this is 1999. every time you do something people do not see, you're always