officer. this is what will happen if you go forward. we will still work closely with the university who is sitting right here. this is the process you can expect if you go through this on campus. you also have the option to tell me some basic information. i don't even have to use your name. so i think all of those options and the victim being in the drivers seat and i believe that with that kind of scenario, and i understand understand why many more victims choose to go forward because they do feel that they are in charge and have choices and they also feel like we keep hearing again and again how victims feel this timeframe is being thrown at them. as you stated, sen., it is another kind of out of control lack of consent and re-victimization in re- victimization in a sense. when we say a certain thing is not working, we think it is because it is not working in collaboration with all of the systems that need to be

at the table, and they need to work together. that is what a memorandum of understanding is. is. we believe that they should be mandatory. we are developing them with all of the institutions. it has really been a give-and-take. we have been at the table with all of those folks. that is what needs to happen and how we build an ideal system of response. it is not a dual approach. the internal process and the law-enforcement piece. victims should be deciding how that entire process goes forward and should pass her or his eyes open the entire time. >> you spent many years in this area.

violence and domestic sexual assault. that is a a crime that has really come out of the shadows. it is now treated much more seriously. does that provide any models >> severe domestic violence. i think the lessons are, address, address this. we need to really listen to victims, listen to what they are saying. we need to train our personal, anyone who is interacting with the victim in trauma informed forensic

interviewing so that they really learn to understand how that victim is impacted. domestic violence, we keep keep asking the question, why did she stay? and i think the more we learn to listen to what the victim experiences the more as law enforcement, the more as university administrators we we will craft our approach to really be in tune with what the victim needs. >> very good words to end the hearing on. the record will stay open for an additional week if anybody wishes to add anything. i appreciate not only the testimony of this panel of witnesses but the life's work that has led up to the testimony and made it so meaningful. i appreciate my seven colleagues.

a a lot of attention, particularly in the waning days of this congress. virtually wildly busy doing things. and i particularly want to recognize. thank him for a positive enthusiastic remarks. so with that adjourned. thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] >> up next the house

aviation subcommittee investigate strong technology and its potential commercial use. investigates the 2012 attack on the us consulate. later in case you missed it a hearing on sexual assault on college campuses. >> secretary of state john kerry asked the senate foreign relations committee to give pres. obama expanded authority to use military force against the militant group isis. the community will debate and authorization for use of military force measure tomorrow and will have live coverage. >> here are some of the programs you will find this weekend. sunday evening at 8:00 o'clock on c-span q&a political reporters here

stories about being on the campaign trail with senator mitch mcconnell. on c-span2 saturday night at 10:00 o'clock on book tv afterwords political fundraiser lindsay mark lewis on money and politics. sunday at ten pm eastern senior correspondent for the daily beast on the military's use of cyberspace to wage war. american history tv saturday at 2:00 o'clock a panel including washington times opinion editor. frank gannon shows clips of his 1983 interview. find a complete television schedule at c-span.org.

>> online retailer amazon says it has begun testing drones in other countries and will die for its research to other countries. next line house panel investigate strong technology and looks at safety concerns. we will here from officials from the faa, faa, the pilots association, and the commercial drawn start up company. congressman frank lobiondo chairs the subcommittee hearing on aviation. >> good morning. the community will come to order.

members will be permitted to sit with the subcommittee. there is a great deal of interest. without objection so ordered i would like to thank all of you for being here. the united states has been the global leader in aviation. we are all very proud of that. the aviation industry contributes billions of dollars to our economy, supports millions of jobs throughout our country, and is a source of pride. unmanned aerial systems have been increasingly in the news. they are not truly new. like other new technologies they offer both exciting opportunities and daunting challenges.

directing the faa to take steps for safely integrating into our nation's airspace by september 2015. we directed the faa to create test sites and regulations. the results appear to be mixed. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. there are many issues surrounding ua as we need to consider. it has always been safety. our safety. our nation's safety record is the result of decades of hard work. the us industry cannot succeed. i am very concerned when i read in the "washington post" that the faa is receiving about 25 reports each month from pilots about uis flying too close to the aircraft.

protecting privacy is equally important as we further integrate and deploy uis. i no the faa and aviation industry are taking the issue seriously. we can all agree they represent a tremendous economic opportunity. eighty-nine to 90 billion will be invested globally in ual seven the next ten years. major us companies have begun investing in ua as technology in a major way there are many valuable applications in real estate, agriculture, medical transport and infrastructure maintenance with many more on the horizon. it is not hard to imagine making existing industries more efficient. all of this can mean new jobs and vast economic

opportunities for the american people. it also concerns me when i read in the "wall street journal" about major us companies taking their uis research and development activities to foreign countries such as canada and australia because faa regulations are too burdensome and too slow. it also concerns me that they are enjoying economic benefits. safety regulators have found ways to permit such flights. i can't help but wonder the germans and canadians do some of these things today, why can we also be doing that. smarter than us? i don't i don't think so. better than us? i don't think so. we really need these questions answered.

i hope we get a better understanding of this issue. as i said earlier, safety is paramount, and the challenges are difficult, but if there is country that is up to the challenge of safe ua s integration it is certainly the united states of america. we have the very best engineers, the smartest inventors, the most creative minds and the knowledgeable regulators to ensure american in aviation in the decades ahead. i know this because many of our best and brightest minds in aviation work at the faa technical center flagship which is in my district. the faa tech center is one-stop shop for the best and brightest to research, develop, demonstrate, and validate demonstrate, and validate new aviation technologies and data sources. it has had a role in many advancements in flight safety including air traffic

control which is key to safe ua s integration. a place where new ideas are developed and old ones are improved. work is underway already, and i fully expect your contributions will continue and will be invaluable. i am interested in hearing today where we are in terms of the ua s industry and what lies ahead, what progress the government has or has not made and what industry and faa need and how we in congress can help as we consider the next faa reauthorization bill. talk with mr. larson and members of the community and the chairman. we are looking at this closely. as we prepare the next faa authorization bill we we will be looking for substantial improvements and advancements in this particular area and will be looking at specific language if we don't see these advances in a timely way. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these topics and thank them for joining us today. before i recognize my colleague for his comments i

would like to ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend the remarks and include extraneous material for the record for this hearing. without objection so ordered. i would now like to yield to mr. larson for his opening remarks. >> thank you, chairman, for calling today's hearing on us unmanned aircraft systems integration oversight and competitiveness. i appreciate you holding his hearing in my request. safety is and must be the faa number one priority. it certainly is mine. we look at unmanned aircraft systems or ua s twice this year. last week's report. the faa must be insured. both of those in the air and people on the ground. the ua s industry has big potential to drive economic growth and create jobs including in washington state where i am from which

is an epicenter of aviation r&d. there is no doubt that their are near-term challenges. the faa receives about 25 reports each month from pilots who have seen unmanned aircraft for model aircraft operating near their aircraft including some new collisions. but we rise to challenge. we do not shrink from them, and i want you, and i want you to consider these headlines with cautionary tales. planes crash in air. man killed. the wyoming state state tribune. two killed, trenton evening times. all of these headlines are from 1917, 1917, 1920. i found more than 80 stories of this kind than 80 stories of this kind alone all written before 1921. these reports could have caused the american public to keep on developing things

that fly. they used to call machines. now we call her planes, but we did not. had we given up a commercial air travel than we would not have the safe and efficient passenger airline system we have today. while our near collision headlines reflect undeniable challenges that must be addressed we have to keep moving forward to ensure progress and competitiveness let's be clear, integration of ua s mess never come at the sake of safety. to help guide this effort the last authorization set forth specific comments and milestones to safely integrate ua s international airspace. we have heard a number of concerns from industry that the faa is now moving quickly enough. the department of transportation inspector general reported engine that the faa had completed work but that the agency was behind schedule. the bill requires the faa to publish a rule by august 14th of this year. we expect that rule soon. the bill also requires the faa to establish test ranges. this test ranges are

up and running. we continue to here from stakeholders that they are not being utilized as much as they can be. however, given the magnitude of the safety implications of incorporating this technology and are sophisticated and crowded airspace we have to give credit where credit is due. proceed with caution and make progress. for example, section 333 authorizing certain operations on an interim basis and advanced final rule on small uis. the faa is just using its authority to grant several exemptions, including some this morning. the morning. the agency allows prudent testing and operations to begin safely. we have heard concerns from other countries. while we must hold safety paramount we do not want to fall the industry behind.

privacy is another major concern that must be addressed, and i show the public's concern about implications of aerial surveillance. i worked to ensure these concerns are addressed to the proper channels. with channels. within the past two years we have seen the faa make progress on implementation with strong bipartisan support of the subcommittee. our work on next agenda shows us the absolute necessity of faa collaboration with stakeholders, especially pilots and air traffic controllers who we will be directly affected. our goal should be to keep us safe integration on track so that we are not here in 2024 talking 2024 talking about a plan to integrate ua s into the airspace. finally, mr. chairman, i would like to ask unanimous consent to enter written remarks in the record. engaged in research and development critical as we look toward reauthorization. >> without objection so ordered. >> i look i look forward to hearing from all of our panelists. while we are here and what we can do and to ensure safety. >> thank you. i am pleased to welcome the

chairman of the full community and thank him for his tremendous interest and involvement in this issue. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome to our panel here today. interested in hearing your testimony and your views on this issue. i share his views on safety. safety is simply paramount. it has to be first and foremost. we are very interested. we directed the faa to safely integrate that into airspace by september 2015. the ua s industry cannot rebel. based on the opening statements by the chairman and the ranking member, republicans and democrats are united in our views

about the priorities and importance of safety. we also understand that you asr and exciting technology with the potential to transform parts of our economy. i am intrigued by how it might improve our modes of transportation. for example, ua s might be used for certain kinds of bridge inspections with the closing lines, traffic stopping. requiring workers to have to climb to the highest places to do inspection. can inspection. can survey 180 acres of land in less than an hour. ua s can safely help us get more bang out of the taxpayer's taxpayers book on infrastructure projects, and with that in mind it is our responsibility to look at this and take a close look at this technology. i no their are challenges to get this right. i am confident that the american inventors, it entrepreneurs are up to the challenge. as we work toward integration we cannot let a few irresponsible individuals jeopardize the safety of the many. i am glad you are all here today.

thank you for holding this hearing, and i yield back. >> thank you, mr. shuster. i want. i want to thank our distinguished panel of witnesses today. associate administrator for aviation safety, essentially all things ua s. assistant inspector general for aviation audits with us department of transportation office of the inspector general. dir. of civil aviation issues for the us government accountability office. president of airline pilot association, head of business development, you are recognized. >> thank you. the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee.

the safe and efficient integration into the national airspace system. in announcing a strategic initiative identified integration of ua s and commercial space operation working hard to meet those mandates. congress mandated the secretary of transportation consult with government partners to develop a comprehensive plan and five-year roadmap. both documents both documents of been published and outline the path ahead. these documents set out a phased approach must be carried out thoughtfully. consistent with congressional direction we announced six ua s sites to aid in integration. as

required we set out to have one test site operational within six months. we surpassed that goal. now all six sides are fully operational and have established a research agenda. the data and information will help answer key questions about how unmanned aircraft systems interface in the airspace as well as with air traffic control. the faa technical center is playing a key role in data collection and analysis and will continue to make significant contributions to ua s integration as we work closely with the test sites to identify the data that we will be the most useful. we are moving forward through rulemaking has mandated. the the initiated rulemaking to permit civil operation of small uis in the airspace. we all agree that the project is taking too long. i am pleased to say we believe we now have a balanced proposal that is

currently under executive review. in the meantime we are looking at activities that do not pose risks to others who operate in the airspace and that can be operated safely. once the secretary of transportation is able to make that determination faa then grants relief. we have authorized 11 operators including five exemptions that we issued today to conduct commercial activity in the national airspace covering activities such as separate. we continue to facilitate the use by public entities for more than two decades authorizing the use of unmanned aircraft for important safety missions. working closely with the department of defense and homeland security and other agencies we are taking advantage of the extensive federal investment that has been made in the systems. in addition more than 35 law

enforcement agencies now operate unmanned aircraft under certificate of authorization and we are working with law enforcement agencies the tech and investigate such activities. we are working hard to educate the public about the requirements and we believe opportunities like this will help us in that endeavor. that has proven to be a challenge. unlike traditional manned aircraft unmanned aircraft are widely available for purchase by individuals who may not realize that they are entering the national airspace system but that they must comply with faa regulations. they may not appreciate the significant safety risk that is presented by unauthorized or unsafe ua s operation in the national airspace. just as you directed in the 2012 act faa can and will

take enforcement action against anyone in a way that endangers the safety of the national airspace. we continue to lead with education because we believe the vast majority of operators want to comply with regulations. we remain committed to serve as world leaders in this segment of the aviation industry. the united states is proud to lead a remotely piloted aircraft. the us will be leading the way to establish standards and recommended practices, procedures, and guidance materials to facilitate integration of remotely piloted aircraft system. together with our international partners we will facilitate integration at the international level. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for inviting me to testify today on efforts to integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system. with increasing demand and

enormous economic implications and competitive implications for our nation. as you know, the the faa modernization act was established for technology. the act directed faa to take stamps to advance integration with the goal of safely integrating technology by 2,015. in june we reported on faa efforts in these 11 recommendations specifically aimed at helping faa more effectively meet the goals. my testimony today will focus on the progress in implementing the act provisions and the challenges that the agency faces and safely integrating technology. today they lead in more than half of the requirements. this includes selecting the test site as well as publishing a roadmap outlining agency plans. in addition using the authority granted in the act faa recently authorized 11 companies to operate. however find schedule on the

ax remaining requirements, many of which are key. for example, faa missed the august deadline for issuing a final rule. these are systems weighing less than 55 pounds. expect to issue a proposed rule soon, it will likely generate a significant amount of comment that the agency will need to consider september 2015. as faa works to implement the provisions the agency faces significant technological regulatory and management challenges. the evolution of the technology is paramount. an operator loses connectivity.

furthermore establishing severe spectrum to support communication has also proven difficult to address. regulatory challenges also affect progress today. authorized limited ua s operations on a case-by-case basis we have not yet positioned to certify civil operations are large-scale. worked with a special advisory committee but has not yet reached consensus with stakeholders on minimum performance and design standards for uas technology. much work remains to set requirements. finally, i would like to turn to the management challenges in areas needed

significant management attention. lack the training, tools, tools, and procedures needed to manage operations. they also lack standard databases to collect and analyze safety data from current us operators and the severity based classification reporting. data will provide critical information related to certification, air traffic control, and technologies and technologies are discussed earlier all of which can inform decisions. other important and much needed steps include publication of the small ua s rule in developing integrated budget documents that clearly identify funding requirements in the near and midterm. in conclusion, ua s will be and remain a front and center issue that requires significant management attention remaining uncertain when and at what pace technology can be fully and safely integrated and our airspace. now is now is the time to

build on the knowledge base to make its important decisions, set priorities, identify critical path issues and develop the basic regulatory framework for integrating technology into national airspace systems. we will continue to monitor progress on these issues and keep the subcommittee apprised of our efforts. mr. chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. i will be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. okay. we will leave it at that for now, ranking member, members of the subcommittee. focusing on three areas. progress toward meeting the unmanned aerial system provision, key research and development activities needed to support unmanned

systems integration and third how other countries have progressed toward integrating unmanned systems in the airspace. regarding the provisions of the 2012 act the act included 17 specific provisions for faa to achieve safe unmanned systems integration by september 2015. while faa has completed most of these provisions key ones remain and additional actions are needed to effectively leverage the completed provisions of the integration effort. for example, a critical step for allowing commercial operations is the publication of the final rule. the developable faa must publish a notice of proposed rulemaking. however, as you as you have heard the npr m has been significantly delayed. given the time that is generally required for rulemaking in the tens of thousands of comments expected on this npr m the

consensus of opinion is that the integration of unmanned systems will likely slipped from the mandated deadline of september 2015 until 2017 or even later. the delay in the final rule which will establish operational and certification requirements or contribute to unmanned systems continuing to operate unsafely and illegally and lead to additional enforcement activities for faa scarce resources. additionally without a small unmanned systems role us businesses continue to take their testing and research and development activity outside of the us. regarding research and development activity the key technology issues remain essentially the same as they have been since the beginning of the unmanned systems are including detect and avoid, command-and-control, airworthiness and spectrum issues. a wide range of stakeholders notable progress. in spite of the progress the role of the six tests sites

remains unclear. the designation and operational startup review by many as a major step forward in acquiring the necessary data to address the technological and operational challenges, our preliminary work suggests that this development has not lived up to his promise. the test site operator told us that they were significantly underutilized by faa and the private sector and that they were unclear as to what research and development and operational data was needed by the faa to support the integration initiative. however, our preliminary work suggested that faa has provided some guidance to the test site regarding the needed research and development and data needs. faa officials say the federal law prevents them from tasking the test site for specific data. according to faa and the law does not allow the agency to give directions to the site

or accept voluntary services without payment. as we continue our study we we will be trying to better understand the relationship between the test site, faa and the needed research and development and how the test site can achieve the highest and best use. regarding foreign countries as is the case in the us many countries around the world are commercial operations under some restrictions. also similar to the us foreign countries are experiencing problems with illegal and unsafe unmanned systems operation. however, a 2014 study in our preliminary observations have revealed that several countries including japan, australia, the united kingdom, canada have progressed further than the united states regulations supporting commercial operations for small unmanned vehicles. but vehicles. but the regulations governing unmanned systems are not consistent worldwide some countries some

countries such as canada are easing operating restrictions. increasing unmanned systems restriction. our ongoing study we will look further at the experiences for potential lessons learned. mr. chairman, ranking member, members of the subcommittee thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. >> ranking member, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity. the critical importance of safely integrating. our country's national airspace, the most endemic in diverse. i want to underscore this the safest.

remotely piloted aircraft systems include aircraft ranging in the size of a small bird to as large as an airliner. some aircraft are operated completely autonomously. the flight route is computer programs. other aircraft are from remotely. perhaps thousands of miles away. the safe use of unmanned aircraft system, we recognize the potential benefit to our nation's economic competitiveness, but we also recognize the potential for a safety risk. airplanes and airspace.

unmanned aircraft can be much smaller or much larger than birds. added risk and that they carry batteries, motors, and other hard metal components. this is a bird strike. please take a look at this, commercial airplane. this next photo of a military a military airplane encounter with an unmanned aerial vehicle. we must not allow pressure to rapidly integrate to rush a a process that must be solely focused on safety, standards and technologies must be in place to ensure the same high level of safety is currently present. authorized occupy the same airspace, operating areas where it might inadvertently

we also need to make certain that ua s pilots are properly trained and understand the consequences of possible malfunctions. now, i knew i would be speaking before you today. i went online last thursday and purchased this quad copter for the community for just a few hundred dollars. i received it two days later. as the marketing promised was ready to fly in a few minutes. carry a camera and has a gps with the purchase of additional software can be used to preprogram a flight plan. it has the capability to fly as high as 6,600 feet. that means it could easily end up in the same airspace i occupy i occupy when i am on approach to land at newark or seattle or any other airport. if we took this aircraft out in the courtyard building and it has the capability to fly from this courtyard to

the final approach path at reagan national airport and from a park at the end of the runway, reagan airport. you can see it we will be easier to fly into the aircraft down. now, a well-trained and experienced flight crew is the most important safety component of the commercial or transportation system. a pilot in the cockpit of an aircraft can see, feel, smell, and here indications of a problem and begin to formulate a course a course of action long before even the most sophisticated indicators. it is essential that pilots are highly trained and qualified and monitored to meet the standards of pilots who operate manned aircraft. we need to make certain that the aircraft cannot spray into areas where it poses a hazard if the operator loses

control and behaves like it is supposed to. intended to be operated in airspace or could unintentionally be foreign to our airspace airline pilots need to be able to see them, cockpit displays. controllers controllers need the ability to see them on their radar scopes. aircraft also need to be equipped with collision avoidance capability. must have a long-term sustained source of funding as well as realistic timeline and a systematic approach to build the path of integration based on safety. we appreciate the opportunity. we look forward to working with congress to ensure that safety is held paramount. >> thank you, captain.

>> chairman, ranking member, members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify. head of business development san francisco-based company developing flight control systems for commercial unmanned aircraft enabling companies to use commercial to collect, analyze, and disseminate data for a growing number of commercial publications around the world. raised over $40 million from several of the world's leading venture capitol firms, and our team is more than doubled. i also serve on the board of the small uav coalition which formed earlier this year. this is a critical time for the aviation industry. a coalition's and others would like to ensure that the united states becomes the global leader for commercial technology development and operation of maintaining the safest airspace in the world.

the current state of uav technology and potential applications in a variety of industries. the need for an approach, the approach, the effect of current and expected regulations on us systems. the uav industry is one of the fastest-growing markets. many may be familiar with the small consumer uav used for personal enjoyment of photography. tackling some of the biggest problems. being used for disaster management, oil and gas exploration, search and rescue, inspection of winter bites. equipped with many technological features to ensure safety and reliability of operations such as geo-fencing systems geo- fencing systems which keep a uav within a certain altitude as well as away from sensitive areas.

enable the uav to automatically return to a safe landing location. enabling operations. in addition also working to develop traffic management system to provide a means for safely managing these systems. my past experience, i understand the challenge in regulating this new and revolutionary technology. there are steps we can be taking taken to begin to open up operational environments now. most commercial uav operations will take place 100 feet below the typical minimum safe altitude of 500 feet for manned aviation which brings me to my second. we must think of knew risk-based approaches. for example, a very a very small aircraft operating in a remote farm field will be

subject to minimum regulatory requirements whereas larger aircraft would require a highly reliable avionics, additional training, geo says technology and failsafe recommend -- mechanisms. these are the type of risk models. i am pleased the faa recently stated its intention to shift to this test model. the critical question is how quickly can you be it be implemented. finally, i would like to discuss the effect of delayed regulation. france allows onerous commercial applications, as does canada, the, the united kingdom, australia, and many other countries. the united states is one of only a few countries that currently prohibits commercial uav operations. while we wait small and large systems are moving uav testing and operations abroad. ..

>> >> we noted a matter the outcome to day to a trilogy will create jobs in save lives there and grow the economy. to mitt is states is poised to lead the way for this

gave a changing industry. we have the talent and though work force to integrate into the most complex airspace let's act quickly before a major opportunities are lost. i look forward to your answering your questions. >> and chairman, ranking member and members of the subcommittee, and thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i've a professor at the department of aeronautics at m.i.t. i of the research program on uav's and urban populated and fireman's. worked with google with the package delivery system in this testimony i am speaking for myself. my main message is we do lead the way in development but to train the next generation is more difficult

in the u.s. than in other countries. these are quite different and larger ones are as a fan is reliable as aircraft so i will focus on small uav's. the vast majority are toy aircraft in the current generation exist because of technologies and computers leaving the smaller is cheaper but there are many companies for commercial use but most can only fly simple missions. a lot of uses have made the news before the most part the current market around the world all the other couple of hundred vehicles that the best there is technological growth limiting uav's is a good

lowe's people though what it is like for the gps to get confused they need to have sensors handout the rhythms to know where they are. they need to know about aircraft around them and obstacles. we need new radio spectrum that they can control the vehicle of all times. infrastructure must grow alongside and those flying through it and italy makes sense if it is less than the manned aircraft. it is needed to drive down the cuban labor costs. and to scale up the product for package delivery they leave another technologies we do have a demonstrated track record but there are hurdles.

from the cycle hewlett-packard to apple is a small team of investors unfortunately it is harder to do test uav technology but is a considerable entry for those who work on technology the process may be right for the pipeline service but unfortunately there is not the single set of rules to be adopted for another country but of clear definition instead of the case by case approval process they know where they can set up their rides to work for u.s. position of leadership depends on the

ability to trade into tears and scientist. and to teach technology to undergrads requires real flights there are too few in the cost is substantial those giving to limit institutions to provide training with uav technology and much of the progress is funded by for the thinking program managers. they have funded the students that run the program today and the students will solve the technology problem.

nevertheless there are constraints that other countries could overtake the u.s. entry in the engineer's. thank you for this opportunity hot mitt back. >> 8q all for being here with your expertise is important that on this subcommittee we have numbers that have expertise and pilots and i think i have them all down there. even a helicopter pilot will be joined by one who is a private and even an aircraft mechanic.

and council was the pilot so we have a lot of expertise for those understand what you say and it will be important as we move forward also to the experts of the subcommittee is very beneficial to us. we're happy they're here to put us through this. in the written testimony stated commercial operators should hold a pilot's license referring to the skills are significantly different some parts of the of curriculum for example, they need to operate stall and recovery techniques and how would benefit safety and what is the scientific basis

for a recommendation? >> on another committee that i sit on rehab the air force where they work initially all of pilots coming out of the pilots pipeline but as it increased they set up the separate track he may be familiar with and they go through all the basic skills of flying for a couple of reasons and one is to understand to make sure that operate properly so we have been briefed we think it is the good model what the faa has done to go through a process of certification the aircraft and then the pilots

to monitor with oversight is the precept'' so should they be reached able to recover from the stalled then i a agree with the curriculum that we need to be focused on the safety part. >> yes to be modified does not make sense. >> we have reports from newspapers and other sources with the proposed rule making and it appears to be not permitted to operate beyond a line of sight that would almost eliminate the benefits that the system brings to us so can you comment specifically on

beyond the line of sight? >> there is stories all the time one is that jfk or he throw that this would be a different hearing it would be catastrophic but if it is going to be operated with that mitt said it needs to have the pilots see it in and it is very difficult if not impossible to see this because i'd like other things in the air if there is not ocean year i cannot pick up. , four helicopters 500 feet and below is where they like flight so i would suggest if

we are operating beyond a line of sight with lots of there planes are used to be away for aircraft control to see it in the person who is operating to communicate with their traffic control and the airplanes in the area in with that you very easily could operate beyond blindsight. in an area and not positive of other airplanes then of course, you could in that manner of the only thing would be what you do with a loss to link the has have been quite a bit in the military. >> this gets back to the point with the risk-based approach you would be in a scenario through technology and for example, they are

only operating at very low altitudes where there is commercial traffic enhancing through technology such as cameras on board where the operator can see if there is traffic in the area to lost link scenarios in if you use a link with your operator you could pre-group -- program to know how to respond so depending on the environment it knows though space june to return tussaud those are technologies in place already today. >>. >> my answer is very consistent beyond line of sight is doable our risk profile makes sense in the

and populated environments in technology issues are consistent hosteling is the challenge to maintain a situation awareness is a question that needs to be addressed but it is doable. >> ct is perrot they think we all agree with that but it can be done as we move forward to make sure we look at the technology and safety aspect that one size does not fit all. thank you. >> that will focus my initial questions on my side of the aisle. but wanted to talk about the technology side and had to look at the six test sites

to make an assessment if they're used as much as they can? or what would you suggest me done otherwise? >> of the six test sites are not my expertise but m.i.t. was heavily involved to set up one of them and i got back in september so i have not looked at what is available there. >> q. did your research and course of study what is the ideal environment? mcfadyen is a good question. one of the limitations is the distance one has to go to get to the test site in the onus of setting up the operations and in the ideal world with the ability to do designate flight areas

anywhere with clear rules i pick the numbers arbitrarily but 150 meters from a ground structure or people to secure the airspace presumably you could not do that downtown cambridge sign that more afield. >> generally what is that ideal environment? >> with the ease of access small and large companies have the same opportunities and safety is of utmost importance so they understand there is testing going on.

and to you get that approval quickly a and rapidly. >> we will talk to the test sites to see if that is happening. >> is there any scenario in the private sector where you can envision a test tube and operations scenario? or the acquisition on certain things? and with those cases with the test site? >> that could be valuable and i know nasa is engaged

to look at things like this. to showcase what it is capable of doing in that will be very important. >> is essential because there is operational scenarios in the infrastructure inspection they will require a more urban environment so the test is the important parts of this.

and is that to conclude? >> we offer that as the tool or a technique in to those locations. and to offer the candidate for that training whenever they are ready. then the designee needs to demonstrate they have the skill with our engineers then they could approve for the test site. for them to come to the test site prep this point it is individual designees the necessarily an organization because there is that level of demand and we think that

organizational model makes sense we could move to that. >> i will yield back. for effective is interaction with faa with the test sites and section 333 could you explain the roles of the tech center cooperative research and development section in 333 how they get to u.s. integrations? in that they are somewhat frustrated there is in the attraction they were expecting. cannery talk about this?

in with all the test sites in to alleviate those early concerns i do think fay got off to a slower start as they come to do understand we see good movement with a slight operations under way but they all get under way. with the ability for the test sites to have their representative in to have the appeal of the test site now want to do research in these areas.

>> is there a plan to use these and a coordination dash end? >> looking at the research needs to the extent we have funding we will use the test sites. right now faa has not placed research at the test site is set up in accordance of the act to allow industry to have access to use air space for research and development to offer the opportunity for those needs in the u.s.. and for the ability to attract that research with the needs could be met we will look to the test site as well.

>> dan to expand that opportunity? >> we try to keep them all informed the into the agreements that they have individuals from the test center and to work closely to get the data through the test site. once they take advantage to have the designee on site that opens the doors for the industry to take advantage. >> in those that do research and development in the u.s. nurses overseas? >> are you interacting with

these companies? do we keep the jobs your is what i am getting at. >>. >> yes the uas office is interacting with industry constantly and there is a conference that we are well represented reaching out not only to public sessions our private meetings to understand what are the needs. the recent newspaper report looks at the exemption under part 333 to seek certification for their vehicle for the purposes of research in the can enable them to accomplish what they need through the test sites and their own certification.

>> there are areas of interest while keeping safety paramount and it is also at the top of the list. >> there is the anti-deficiency act where you cannot give direction on a test site because they provide the uncompensated service had your lawyers really looked at that to see if there is a way around that? or is there a way to fix that? and rick our lawyers have looked at it with the advice they have given us and will ask them to see if there is an alternative but if we try to make them attractive to

industry. >> and also heard from some is a bureaucratic process to run one flight to have to file the papers if to modify to run another you cannot just say we will change eight perimeters. >> we are working with the test sites we are calling for a broad co-author is a shan. >> if you have the test site with those parameters then someone says come back in another 30 days to run in a modified? they thought it -- they should be able to do multiple operations with different parameters for people to observe that would be able to facilitate so i hope we can do that quickly.

>> but it does cost as. >> we don't consider them geographically dispersed. in that is another thing. are we seriously pursuing a risk-based approach that may be one of the vast areas with no potential conflict. >> each of the 333 request what is the level of risk in what implementations need to be added. >> we do have applicants to

certify the systems with that of risk-based approach with a certification rules in what are the risks that need to be addressed. >> geographic makes sense for their risk-based approach to secondary and tertiary and whole different problem. and there is one other question with the film industry with section and 333 they have to have a separate operating authorization that has not been granted. >> they need approval to operate in the aerospace and put out a notice when they are occurring. i believe all but one have

gotten that approval for one particular location in. in to make that more efficient as well. >> transponders, house malkin useful transponder be these days? >> some of the smaller ones right now are the size of a small -- of a cell phone. there is some costs associated but it could be helpful technology where there could be other traffic in the area. >> a certain altitude evade transponder. >>. >> then the of live linkt÷

>> >> and we are working with the test site how we can expand that. >> have we implemented any recommendations from foreign countries to help alleviate? >> i am not aware rehab recommendations from foreign countries. >> if we learn but don't implement does not do good. >> but we are looking how to implement to look for ways

to do this safely. >> i yield back. >> think the members to watching the clock we have folks who want to have questions. >> i represent loss figure is there is a lot of enthusiasm for the drums or the uas rehab open space comair force base in the creative gaming industry that was to provide bottle service by the pool. it is great with the potential we are a test center but the enthusiasm is starting to wane because the test site is not producing when we thought it would and i hear the positivity but

those that have briefed me are more in line with what the doctor points out there don't think it is getting off the ground and i heard mrs. gilligan say about three different times we're working on this so we can start to address some of the concerns but that does not give me comfort begins to have been working on the rules for such a long time i don't think that addresses the concerns that will get is there in time to be competitive but not know why business would not just go to canada will instead of hours. what i hear over and over in one is we don't know what information and should be collected or what data is the procedures that should be provided proprietary you're working on establishing that but there

is no time frame so that could be who knows? the second problem is the process you have to do it over every single time. but the problem of intellectual property to protect industrial secrets to give the information and sousa faa could you address these questions or give us your perspective? >> i would be glad to. >> nevada has stepped out to begin the approval process

is they believe using a designee will allow them to bring industry so that is an important step forward so they can market the ability to bring the research to the test site not to plateresque from earlier on. >> to prioritize the request they have approved authorities for aerospace trying to work his those as

a location in tears take advantage of what we can learn. and i'm sorry i forget the first foreign. and the data. to is a place for industry for research and develop them. in terms of the data we realize it is a valuable piece of information for the test site to have rehab by defied the needs the faa has with the of conference calls pithead is that we may

understand what could be helpful based on the work at the test site. >> and those are the key issues. as our is increasing their value in and capacity as the faa fizzles those things that will go a long way. but the key is what was set about looking at the anti-deficience a lot and is there a way that the fund could be made available in the test site and the adl we

only have six test sites to suggest that in canada for example, to designate 18,000 feet beyond line of sight so perhaps as we move towards the next page nine of the additional test sites and maximum use of the current ones we think of risk-based approach. >> thank you. >> i appreciate the opportunity to question the subcommittee but from the context of safety juxtaposition what we miss

out on but just looking at an article on november november 14th so it is not on the weekend flown by a of a guy in the military in did a strong evasive maneuver to make sure he did not hit the aircraft. it is not just cms in the us a month one came within 10 feet those uses for

business in to make sure to understand the rules mandate make sense and for one question what is the cost of the hinges of the airplane to fly? >> millions and millions of dollars. >> if it would fly through or hid it air and end the damage that we showed earlier in every year all

over the risk-based security in to make sure that they are safe to have the different conversation if it is closer to the 10 feet. one so what specifications is the faa contemplating the of uas to insure pilots can detect a and avoid? . .