FAA REAUTHORIZATION 

ACT

Progress and Challenges 

Implementing Various 

Provisions of the 2012 Act

Statement of Gerald L. Dillingham, PhD, Director, 

Physical Infrastructure Issues

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation, 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, House of 

Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

GAO-14-285T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-14-285T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Aviation, 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, House of Representatives

February 5, 2014

FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT

Progress and Challenges Implementing Various 

Provisions of the 2012 Act

Why GAO Did This Study

The U.S. air transportation system is

the busiest and among the safest in 

the world. Even so, maintaining and 

improving the extraordinary level of 

connectivity and mobility the system 

affords us, and the safety record that 

has been achieved to date requires 

continued attention and effort. In the 

2012 Act, Congress directed FAA to 

take various actions to improve the 

safety and efficiency of the current 

NAS while transitioning to NextGen. In 

addition, given the potential and 

opportunities afforded by new UAS 

technologies, the 2012 Act included 

several provisions with respect to FAA 

safely integrating UAS into the NAS.

Based on work GAO has conducted for 

this Committee since the passage of 

the 2012 Act, this testimony discusses 

FAA’s challenges and progress in 

1) implementing NextGen,

2) improving aviation safety, and 

3) integrating UAS into the 

national airspace system. 

This statement is drawn from several 

GAO reports completed since the 2012 

Act, as well as additional reports from 

prior to the 2012 Act on these topics.

To update information in those reports, 

GAO conducted interviews with 

officials from FAA and industry, and 

reviewed agency documents. 

What GAO Found

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the 2012 Act) contained 

several provisions related to implementing the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen)—a complex, long-term initiative to 

incrementally modernize and transform the national airspace system (NAS). 

GAO’s recent work on NextGen has highlighted three key implementation issues: 

• Improving NextGen Leadership: Complex transformations, such as NextGen, 

require substantial leadership commitment over a sustained period, and 

leaders must both be empowered to make critical decisions and be held 

accountable for results. The 2012 Act created a Chief NextGen Officer that

FAA appointed in June 2013, and FAA has recently filled other key NextGen 

leadership positions. With these positions filled, FAA should be in a better 

position to resolve its NextGen leadership challenges.

• Demonstrating Near-Term Benefits: The 2012 Act included a number of 

provisions aimed at accelerating the creation of performance-based 

navigation (PBN) procedures, such as following precise routes that use the 

Global Positioning System, which can save airlines and other aircraft 

operators money through reduced fuel burn and flight time. FAA must 

continue to deliver PBN capabilities and begin to demonstrate a return on 

operator’s investments. As of January 2014, FAA has implemented PBN 

procedures at two of the five airports selected for early deployment.

• Balancing the Needs of the Current Air–Traffic Control System and NextGen:

While the 2012 Act contained a number of provisions aimed at accelerating 

NextGen implementation, GAO found that FAA’s budget planning does not 

fully account for the impact on the agency’s operating costs of the NextGen 

systems that will be deployed in future years, along with the need for 

continued operation and maintenance of existing systems and facilities. Cost 

estimates for maintaining existing systems and facilities coupled with 

implementing NextGen exceed anticipated funding levels. GAO

recommended improvements to FAA’s budget–planning and infrastructurecondition data, which FAA is working to implement.

Safety in the aviation industry is achieved in part through adherence to various 

certification standards. The 2012 Act required FAA to work with industry to 

assess the certification process. GAO’s work has found that while FAA has made 

progress developing its plan to implement these recommendations, FAA 

continues to lack performance measures to track its progress. 

For unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), FAA has implemented 7 of the 17 

requirements established in the 2012 Act, representing progress since GAO’s 

last update in January 2013. However, FAA continues to experience challenges 

implementing the provisions in the 2012 Act and integrating UAS into the NAS.

For example, although FAA has had efforts under way since 2008 supporting a 

rulemaking on small UAS, it is unlikely that FAA will meet the August 2014 final 

rule deadline required by the 2012 Act since it has not yet issued a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking. In addition, while FAA created the UAS Integration Office 

in 2013 to lead UAS integration, as of January 2014, the program lacks an 

operations budget.

View GAO-14-285T. For more information, 

contact Gerald L. Dillingham at (202) 512-

2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov.
Page 1 GAO-14-285T 

Chairman LoBiondo, Ranking Member Larsen, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on progress made by the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in implementing key provisions of 

the FAA Modernization and Reform Act (the 2012 Act).1 The U.S. air 

transportation system is the busiest and among the safest in the world, 

with key aviation stakeholders—FAA, the airlines and other aircraft 

operators, airports, aircraft manufacturers, and others—working together 

to achieve these results. Nevertheless, FAA must not become 

complacent because of the extraordinary level of connectivity and mobility 

the system affords us, or the safety record that has been achieved to 

date. Thus, in the 2012 Act, the Congress directed FAA to take various 

actions to improve the safety and efficiency of the current air traffic control 

(ATC) system while transitioning to the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen).2

My statement today is based on work on these issues we have completed 

for the Subcommittee since passage of the 2012 Act, including (1) 

implementing NextGen, (2) improving aviation safety, particularly with 

respect to implementing provisions of the 2012 Act related to FAA’s 

certification processes, and (3) integrating UAS into the NAS. The 2012 

Act also directed us to complete eight studies on a variety of aviation 

topics. Appendix II lists seven of those mandated studies that have been 

completed and contains information on our key findings.

In addition, given the potential 

opportunities afforded by new unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), the 

2012 Act included several provisions with respect to FAA safely 

integrating UAS into the national airspace system (NAS). Ongoing 

improvements to safety, implementation of NextGen, and integration of 

UAS continue to be paramount as Congress considers FAA’s progress to 

date, and begins to consider the next reauthorization bill.

3

 1

Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 11 (2012).

2

The objective of the NextGen initiative is to transform the current radar-based system to 

one centered on satellite-based navigation, automated position reporting, and digital 

communications. See appendix I for a listing of recent GAO reports related to NextGen, 

among others. 

3

Section 808 of the 2012 Act mandated that GAO perform a study and report to Congress 

on the impact of increases in aviation fuel prices on the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and 

the aviation industry in general. A final report will be issued in spring 2014. 
Page 2 GAO-14-285T 

This statement is drawn from several reports that we completed since 

passage of the 2012 Act, as well as additional reports from prior to the 

Act on these topics. We have updated this information through a review of 

FAA documents and interviews with FAA officials, as well as interviews 

with relevant advisory groups. In addition to the information on the seven 

completed studies mandated in the 2012 Act listed in appendix II, a list of 

other related GAO products is included in appendix I of this statement, 

along with footnoted references to these products throughout the 

statement. We reviewed and analyzed documents and interviewed 

relevant government, academic, and private-sector entities to address 

these objectives. The reports and testimonies cited in this statement 

contain more detailed explanations of the methods used to conduct our 

work. The work upon which this testimony is based on was conducted in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

More than 10 years ago, Congress directed FAA to conceptualize and 

plan NextGen; FAA is now implementing key NextGen systems and 

capabilities. NextGen was envisioned as a major redesign of the air 

transportation system to increase efficiency, enhance safety, and reduce 

flight delays that would entail precision satellite navigation and 

surveillance; digital, networked communications; an integrated weather 

system; and more. Figure 1 provides examples of changes and benefits 

that are expected to come from NextGen.

FAA Faces Several 

Challenges 

Implementing 

NextGen
Page 3 GAO-14-285T 

Figure 1: Examples of NextGen Changes and Benefits

Notes: The baseline reflects an aircraft’s flight path in the current air-traffic control system.

“Four-dimensional (4-D) trajectory” operations is an air traffic management concept in which every 

aircraft that is operating in or managed by the air traffic control system is represented in four 

dimensions—latitude, longitude, altitude, and with time. 

a

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) is a technology that will enable aircraft to 

continually broadcast flight data—such as position, air speed, and altitude— among other types of 

information, to air traffic controllers and other aircraft.

The transition to NextGen—which encompasses multiple programs, 

procedures, and systems at different levels of maturity—is a complex, 

incremental, multi-year process. Since 2006, we have monitored FAA’s 

development of NextGen and identified a number of key challenges 

facing the agency’s implementation efforts. The 2012 Act included several 

provisions that address some of the issues that we have identified in our 

work, including incentivizing aircraft operators to equip with NextGen

technologies, developing performance measures, and involving 

stakeholders in NextGen development.4

 4

For provisions related to NextGen, see 2012 Act, §§ 201-225, 126 Stat., 36-56.

Our recent work on FAA’s 

progress in implementing NextGen has highlighted ongoing challenges in 
Page 4 GAO-14-285T 

three areas: improving leadership, demonstrating near-term benefits, and 

balancing the needs of the current system while implementing NextGen

systems.

Our work has found that complex organizational transformations, such as 

NextGen, involving technology, systems, and retraining key personnel 

require substantial leadership commitment over a sustained period, and 

that leaders must be empowered to make critical decisions and held 

accountable for results. Transitions, inconsistent leadership, and unclear 

roles and responsibilities can weaken the effectiveness of the internal and 

external collaboration required for successful implementation. Both the 

magnitude of the multi-year transition, as well as the numerous efforts 

under way throughout the different offices and divisions in FAA to 

effectuate that transition, will require FAA’s leaders to manage all aspects 

of NextGen in a strategic, timely, and coordinated fashion.

FAA has struggled to have the leadership in place to manage and 

oversee NextGen implementation,5 but more recently, has begun to fill 

key positions. In June 2013, FAA appointed a new Deputy Administrator 

and designated a Chief NextGen Officer, in response to Section 204 of 

the 2012 Act.6

 5

See GAO, NextGen Air Transportation System: FAA Has Made Some Progress in 

Midterm Implementation, but Ongoing Challenges Limit Expected Benefits, 

In addition, in September 2013, FAA appointed a new 

Assistant Administrator for NextGen—a position that had previously been 

vacant. Designating one leader—such as the Deputy Administrator’s 

responsibility over NextGen—can be beneficial because it centralizes 

accountability and can speed decision-making. With these positions now 

filled, FAA should be in a better position to resolve its NextGen leadership 

challenges. However, as I have stated in other work, a number of offices 

oversee certain aspects of NextGen, not all of which report to the 

Assistant Administrator, and implementation will require successful 

collaboration between these offices. As these positions have only recently 

been filled, it is not yet clear how effective the changes resulting from the 

2012 Act will be in achieving that collaboration.

GAO-13-264 

(Washington, D.C. April 2013); and GAO, National Airspace System: Improved Budgeting 

Could Help FAA Better Determine Future Operations and Maintenance Priorities, 

GAO-13-693 (Washington, D.C. Aug, 2013).

6

2012 Act, § 204, 126 Stat., 37. 

Improving NextGen

Leadership
Page 5 GAO-14-285T 

Another key development in NextGen management envisioned by 

Section 208 of the 2012 Act7 redesignated the Director of the Joint 

Planning and Development Office (JPDO) as an Associate Administrator 

reporting directly to the FAA Administrator and defined that 

administrator’s responsibility for coordination and planning with FAA’s 

partner agencies.8 This change has not been fully implemented by FAA. 

However, in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014, Congress 

eliminated direct funding of JPDO, and subsumed JPDO in FAA’s 

operations budget. At this point, it remains unclear whether a JPDO 

Director position will continue and, if not, how the roles and 

responsibilities of that office, particularly with respect to long-term 

planning and coordination of research and development efforts across 

partner agencies, will be redistributed within FAA. We will continue to 

monitor these issues in two studies requested by this committee—one 

examining the organizational and leadership structure of the NextGen

effort, and one looking more in-depth at actions FAA has taken to 

streamline its organization. We have begun both of these examinations.

To convince operators to make investments in NextGen equipment, FAA 

must continue to deliver systems, procedures, and capabilities that 

demonstrate near-term benefits and a return on an operator’s 

investments. In particular, a large percentage of the current U.S. air 

carrier fleet is equipped to fly more precise performance-based navigation 

(PBN) procedures, such as following precise routes that use the Global 

Positioning System or glide descent paths, which can save airlines and 

other aircraft operators money through reduced fuel burn and flight time.9

 7

2012 Act, § 208, 126 Stat., 40. 

However, aircraft operators have expressed concerns that FAA has been

slow to produce new procedures for various reasons, and has not 

produced the most useful or beneficial PBN routes and procedures.

8

FAA’s partner agencies in the NextGen effort include the Departments of Commerce 

(particularly its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)), Defense 

(DOD), and Homeland Security (DHS); the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA); and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy 

(OSTP).

9

PBN uses advance guidance technology to improve the precision of air-traffic control 

routes (known as “procedures”). These procedures can deliver benefits to airlines such as 

fuel savings and increased efficiency, particularly in congested airspace. 

Demonstrating Near-Term 

Benefits
Page 6 GAO-14-285T 

The 2012 Act included a number of provisions aimed at accelerating the 

creation of PBN procedures. For example, Section 213 of the 2012 Act10

directed FAA to develop plans to identify beneficial PBN procedures and 

to prioritize their implementation at key airports. We reported in April of 

2013 that FAA had made progress in focusing its PBN efforts at seven 

priority metroplexes with airport operations that have a large effect on the 

overall efficiency of the NAS.11

Our work also found that FAA does not have a system for tracking the 

use of existing PBN procedures. As a result, FAA is unable to assure that 

investment in these routes is worthwhile or that they justify the cost to 

develop and maintain them. Further, in the absence of data on the use of 

existing PBN routes, airlines and other stakeholders remain unconvinced 

that the investments needed for the full implementation of NextGen will be 

justified. Such data could help the agency demonstrate the value of PBN 

technologies and any resulting benefits, as well as allow the agency to 

identify routes that need to be revised to increase their use. We made 

recommendations to FAA to develop a system to track the use of PBN 

procedures and a process to proactively identify new PBN procedures 

based on NextGen goals and targets. We will continue to monitor FAA’s 

progress in implementing these recommendations.

More recently, FAA reports that it is 

considering recommendations from the NextGen Advisory Committee 

(NAC) regarding revalidation of the criteria used to prioritize these 

metroplexes, and that recent efforts have been diverted to metroplexes 

where the deployment of the new En Route Automation Management 

(ERAM) system is complete, in order not to interfere with ERAM 

deployment at those locations where it is ongoing.

The 2012 Act also included two other key provisions to accelerate the 

creation of PBN procedures. The first was a categorical exclusion from 

environmental review for PBN procedures that if implemented could 

demonstrate measurable reductions in fuel consumption, carbon dioxide 

emissions, and noise, on a per-flight basis, as compared to aircraft 

 102012 Act, § 213, 126 Stat., 46. 

11GAO-13-264. 
Page 7 GAO-14-285T 

operations that follow existing procedures.12 However, our April 2013 

report found that, according to FAA, potential noise impacts are 

measured cumulatively for all flights and that FAA has not yet identified 

an approach for per-flight assessments. FAA officials stated that no 

currently available methodology resolves the technical problems involved 

in making such a determination, so the agency has not applied this new 

categorical exclusion.13 Second, the 2012 Act called for the agency to 

establish a program for qualified third parties to develop, test, and 

maintain flight procedures.14 FAA has made some progress in this area 

by awarding a $2.8-million contract to GE’s Naverus and a partner to 

develop two PBN procedures each at five mid-sized airports. The 

contractors are to design, evaluate, and maintain these procedures and 

be responsible for providing environmental data and analysis to FAA to 

support categorical exclusions and for drafting any required National 

Environmental Policy Act reviews, for review and approval by FAA. As of 

January 2014, PBN procedures had been implemented at two of the five 

selected airports.

NextGen represents a transition from existing ATC systems and facilities 

to new systems, potentially necessitating changes to or consolidation of 

existing facilities. We have reported over the years that various 

investment and policy decisions, including what existing ATC systems 

and facilities will remain in the NAS during the transition and for how long, 

have yet to be made.15

 12A federal action may be categorically excluded—thus exempting it from further federal 

environmental review—if, based on agency experience, the agency has determined the 

proposed action is within a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the environment and there are no extraordinary circumstances 

in which a normally excluded action may have a significant environmental effect. See 40 

C.F.R. § 1508.4.

For the systems and facilities that remain, FAA will 

have to monitor and maintain their performance and condition while the 

agency implements the NextGen transition. Decisions about the number 

of existing systems and facilities that will remain in operation during the 

13See Section 213(c)(1) and (2), and Section 213(f).

14GAO-13-264.

15GAO, Integration of Current Implementation Efforts with Long-term Planning for the Next 

Generation Air Transportation System, GAO-11-132R (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2010) 

and Next Generation Air Transportation System: FAA Faces Implementation Challenges,

GAO-12-1011T (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2012).

Balancing the Needs of 

the Current and NextGen

Systems
Page 8 GAO-14-285T 

transition have implications for FAA’s capital and operations budgets 

going forward. If aging systems and associated facilities are not retired, 

FAA will miss potential opportunities to reduce its overall maintenance 

costs at a time when resources needed to maintain both systems and 

facilities may become scarcer.

The 2012 Act contained a number of provisions aimed at accelerating the 

implementation of NextGen systems.16 However, we found in August 

2013 that FAA’s budget planning does not fully account for the potential 

impact of NextGen systems that will be deployed and the need for 

continued operations and maintenance of existing systems and 

facilities.17

In our August 2013 report we recommended improvements to FAA’s 

budget-planning and infrastructure-condition data, improvements that 

FAA is currently considering. Improved budget planning and accurate and 

reliable data on infrastructure condition could help Congress better 

understand the funding requirements of existing systems and facilities 

and facilitate FAA’s efforts to support the agency’s mission of continuing 

to safely operate the NAS along with the longer-term goal of transitioning 

In the 2012 Act, Congress also expressed concern regarding 

the condition of FAA facilities and mandated that we study their condition. 

In our September 2013 report, we noted that FAA estimates its staffed 

facilities like towers and Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) 

facilities have about $260 million in deferred maintenance; unstaffed 

facilities, such as shelters and communication towers that house and 

support NAS equipment, had an estimated $446 million in deferred 

maintenance in 2012. These, and other cost estimates for maintaining 

existing systems and facilities, along with implementing NextGen exceed 

anticipated funding levels. However, we concluded that FAA’s imprecise 

facility-condition data do not facilitate agency-wide priority assessments, 

which, in turn, could hinder the agency’s ability to target its limited 

resources on those projects in greatest need of repair and that are most 

critical to the NAS. In addition, section 804 of the 2012 Act directed FAA 

to complete a study on the consolidation and realignment of FAA services 

and facilities to support the transition to NextGen. However, FAA has yet 

to identify which facilities would be consolidated or realigned, and 

according to FAA officials, the study will continue through 2014.

 16See, for example, Section 211, 213, and 216. 

17GAO-13-693.
Page 9 GAO-14-285T 

to NextGen. We will continue to monitor FAA’s progress in implementing 

these recommendations.

The U.S. air transportation system remains one of the safest in the world. 

As part of FAA’s efforts to maintain and improve the safety of the system, 

FAA issues certificates and approvals for new air operators, new aircraft, 

and aircraft parts and equipment, and grants approvals for changes to air 

operations and aircraft based on FAA’s interpretation of federal standards 

(see fig. 2). These certificates and approvals indicate that such things as 

new aircraft, the design and production of aircraft parts and equipment, 

and new air operators are safe for use in the NAS. However, our previous 

work has highlighted FAA’s inconsistent regulatory interpretation of 

certification standards. In 2010, we found that variation in FAA’s 

interpretation of standards for certification and approval decisions was a 

long-standing issue and made recommendations to improve those 

processes.18 Subsequently, the 2012 Act required FAA to work with 

industry to assess the certification process, including reviewing our 

previous work and developing recommendations to address the concerns 

that we and others have raised.19

Figure 2: FAA Conducts Inspections as Part of Certification

 18GAO, Aviation Safety: Certification and Approval Processes Are Generally Viewed as 

Working Well, but Better Evaluative Information Needed to Improve Efficiency, GAO-11-14 

(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2010).

19Pub. L. No. 112-95, § 312 and § 313, 126 Stat. 11, 66 and 67(2012). GAO-11-14. 

FAA Is Continuously 

Working to Improve 

Safety and Has Made 

Progress in Improving 

Its Certification 

Processes
Page 10 GAO-14-285T 

As required by Section 312 of the 2012 Act, FAA, in consultation with 

representatives of the aviation industry, made recommendations to the 

director of FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service regarding streamlining and 

reengineering the certification process. These recommendations, which 

we found to be relevant, clear, and actionable, called for FAA to:

1. improve the effectiveness of its delegation programs,

2. update certification procedures to reflect a systems approach to 

safety,

3. review operational safety and rulemaking processes, and

4. implement efficiency reforms, among others. 20

In July 2013, FAA released its plan to implement these recommendations. 

The plan included 14 initiatives and programs that FAA either had under 

way or intended to start to improve efficiency and reduce costs related to 

certifications. We found these initiatives were generally relevant to the 

recommendations and were clear and measurable. However, we found 

that FAA’s plans do not contain some of the elements essential to a 

performance measurement process.21

Also resulting from issues found in our 2010 report on certification, 

section 313 of the Act directed FAA to establish an advisory panel to 

For example, FAA has developed 

milestones for each initiative and deployed a tracking system to monitor 

the implementation of all certification-related initiatives, but it has not yet 

developed performance measures to track the success of most of the 

initiatives and programs. According to an FAA official, the agency has 

started discussions with industry stakeholders to identify key goals related 

to performance measurement. Because industries’ goals and FAA’s goals 

may be different with respect to the certification process, developing 

meaningful performance measures is a complex task that the agency 

plans to continue in 2014. The Committee recently asked us to examine 

in more detail FAA’s progress and any challenges experienced in 

implementing the recommendations and making improvements to its 

certification processes, and will be tracking FAA’s efforts going forward.

 20See GAO, Aviation Safety, Status of Recommendations to Improve FAA’s Certification 

and Approval Processes, GAO-14-142T, (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 30, 2013).

21GAO-14-142T. 
Page 11 GAO-14-285T 

address inconsistencies in the interpretation of regulations by the 

certification offices. Consistent with issues raised in our 2010 report, this 

committee identified three root causes of inconsistent interpretation of 

regulations: (1) unclear regulatory requirements; (2) inadequate and 

nonstandard FAA and industry training in developing regulations, applying 

standards, and resolving disputes; and (3) a culture that includes a 

general reluctance by both industry and FAA to work issues of 

inconsistent regulatory application through to a final resolution and a “fear 

of retribution.” To address these root causes, the committee made six 

recommendations, including developing a master source of guidance and 

developing instructions for FAA staff with policy development 

responsibility. We found that the advisory committee took a reasonable

approach in identifying the root causes and that its recommendations 

were relevant, actionable, and clear.22

FAA reported in January 2014 that it was still determining the feasibility of 

implementing these recommendations. The agency told us that it 

expected to publish an action plan to address the recommendations and 

metrics to measure implementation by late June 2014, more than six 

months after FAA’s initial target. We note that while measuring 

implementation may be useful, FAA is not intending to measure 

outcomes, a measurement that could help in understanding if an action is 

having the intended effect.

The committee also considered the 

feasibility of the recommendations by identifying modifications to existing 

efforts and programs and prioritizing the recommendations.

UAS are aircraft and associated equipment that do not carry a pilot 

aboard, but instead operate on pre-programmed routes or are manually 

controlled by pilot-operated ground stations. Although current nonmilitary, domestic uses of UAS are limited to activities such as law 

enforcement, forensic photography, border security, and scientific data 

collection, UAS have a wide range of other potential commercial uses—

including vehicular traffic monitoring, crop dusting, and pipeline 

inspections—and the market for UAS use is expected to grow. Concerned 

with the pace of integrating UAS into the NAS, Congress established 

specific requirements and set deadlines for FAA in the 2012 Act.

 22GAO-14-142T.

While Progress Has 

Been Made, Safely 

Integrating UAS into 

the NAS Will 

Continue to Present 

Challenges for FAA
Page 12 GAO-14-285T 

FAA has several efforts under way to satisfy the 2012 Act’s requirements, 

most of which must be achieved by December 2015. In January 2013 we 

reported that of the seven deadlines that had passed, FAA had completed

two items. However, since that time, FAA has satisfied a number of 

additional milestones (see app. III for an update of all the 2012 Act’s 

requirements with respect to UAS). Of particular note:

• JPDO and FAA released a UAS Comprehensive Plan and a UAS 

Roadmap, respectively, in November 2013 to outline the nation’s UAS 

goals and objectives and the tasks necessary to achieve UAS 

integration.23 24

• In late December 2013, FAA selected the six locations for its UAS test 

site program.

• FAA established permanent Arctic areas where small UAS can 

operate for research and commercial purposes and the first flight took 

place in the fall of 2013.

While progress has been made implementing some of the key milestones 

established in the 2012 Act, integrating UAS into the NAS continues to 

challenge FAA leading to uncertainty about when UAS integration will be 

achieved.25

 23JPDO, Unmanned Aircraft Systems Comprehensive Plan: A Report on the Nation’s UAS 

Path Forward (Washington, D.C.: September, 2013). 

For example, while FAA announced the six locations for its 

UAS test site program, FAA has not yet defined what operational, safety, 

and performance data it needs from the test sites and how that data will 

be collected and analyzed. We previously reported that use of these data 

would be important in developing safety, reliability, and performance 

standards, which are needed to guide and validate the supporting 

research and development efforts. FAA and industry stakeholders have 

stated that data and other information generated by the test sites will be 

important in helping FAA answer key research questions related to UAS 

operations and developing regulations and operational procedures for 

future commercial and civil use of UAS. Finally, to increase collaboration 

and provide stable organizational leadership, and focus on UAS 

integration efforts, FAA created the UAS Integration Office in 2013. While 

the office did not have an operations budget, as of January 2014, the 

24FAA, Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System 

Roadmap: First Edition—2013 (Washington, D.C.: November, 2013). 

25FAA, Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System 

Roadmap: First Edition—2013 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 2013). 
Page 13 GAO-14-285T 

office has 33 full time employees, and FAA is still finalizing agreements 

and other arrangements related to the reorganization, and it remains 

unclear what resources the office will have available to fulfill its role.

Moving forward, FAA has a number of important milestones it must meet 

to ensure UAS integration into the NAS. A key next step, according to 

FAA officials and industry stakeholders, will be to adopt a final rule for 

small UAS operations.26

In closing, FAA has made some progress in implementing various parts of 

the 2012 Act, and is seeking to address some of the key challenges it 

faces. Going forward, we will continue to monitor FAA’s progress, 

highlight the key challenges that remain, and the steps FAA and industry 

can take to find a way forward on the issues covered in this statement as 

well as other issues facing the industry. For example as previously 

mentioned, we have work underway to examine organizational and 

leadership issues with NextGen, and to examine, in greater detail, FAA’s 

certification processes and progress made with respect to UAS. In 

addition, for this Committee we will be examining issues related to 

funding airport development, including passenger facility charges, airport 

improvement program grants, and the potential for greater private sector 

investment through public-private partnerships.

Although FAA has had efforts under way since 

2008 supporting a rulemaking on small UAS, it is unlikely that FAA will 

meet the August 2014 final rule deadline required by the 2012 Act. For 

example, FAA has not yet issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for 

small UAS, and recently estimated that one will not be released until 

November 2014. Further, FAA must develop standards—and determine 

what data are necessary to inform that process—to facilitate safe UAS 

integration into the NAS. More broadly, to achieve UAS integration, FAA 

faces the challenge of ensure that all of the various efforts supporting 

these integration issues within its own agency, as well as across federal 

agencies and other entities, align and converge in a timely fashion. We 

have begun additional work on UAS that will be looking specifically at 

collaboration between federal agencies responsible for UAS integration 

into the NAS and the research and development priorities in the area of 

research and development to support UAS integration.

 26Generally, a small UAS is less than 55 pounds, while a large UAS is 55 pounds or more. 

According to an industry association, small UAS are expected to comprise the majority of 

UAS that will operate in the national airspace.
Page 14 GAO-14-285T 

Chairman LoBiondo, Ranking Member Larsen, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be 

pleased to respond to any questions that you may have at this time.
Appendix I: Related GAO Reports and 

Testimonies

Page 15 GAO-14-285T 

NextGen Air Transportation System: FAA Has Made Some Progress in 

Midterm Implementation, but Ongoing Challenges Limit Expected 

Benefits. GAO-13-264. Washington. D.C.: April 8, 2013.

Next Generation Air Transportation System: FAA Faces Implementation 

Challenges. GAO-12-1011T. Washington, D.C.: September 12, 2012.

Air Traffic Control Modernization: Management Challenges Associated 

with Program Costs and Schedules Could Hinder NextGen

Implementation. GAO-12-223. Washington, D.C.: February 16, 2012.

Next Generation Air Transportation System: FAA Has Made Some 

Progress in Implementation, but Delays Threaten to Impact Costs and 

Benefits. GAO-12-141T. Washington, D.C.: October 5, 2011.

Integration of Current Implementation Efforts with Long-term Planning for 

the Next Generation Air Transportation System. GAO-11-132R. 

Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2010.

NextGen Air Transportation System: FAA’s Metrics Can Be Used to 

Report on Status of Individual Programs, but Not of Overall NextGen

Implementation or Outcomes. GAO-10-629. Washington, D.C.: July 27, 

2010.

Aviation Safety, Status of Recommendations to Improve FAA’s 

Certification and Approval Processes. GAO-14-142T. Washington, D.C.: 

Oct. 30, 2013.

Aviation Safety: FAA Efforts Have Improved Safety, but Challenges 

Remain in Key Areas. GAO-13-442T. Washington, D.C.: April 16. 2013.

Aviation Safety: Additional FAA Efforts Could Enhance Safety Risk 

Management. GAO-12-898. Washington, D.C.: September 12, 2012.

Aviation Safety: Certification and Approval Processes Are Generally 

Viewed as Working Well, but Better Evaluative Information Needed to 

Improve Efficiency. GAO-11-14. Washington, D.C.: October 7, 2010.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Continued Coordination, Operational Data, 

and Performance Standards Needed to Guide Research and 

Development. GAO-13-346T. Washington, D.C.: February 15, 2013.

Appendix I: Related GAO Reports and 

Testimonies

NextGen

Aviation Safety and 

Certification

Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems (UAS)
Appendix I: Related GAO Reports and 

Testimonies

Page 16 GAO-14-285T 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Measuring Progress and Addressing 

Potential Privacy Concerns Would Facilitate Integration into the National 

Airspace System. GAO-12-981. Washington, D.C.: Sept. 14, 2012.
Appendix II: Key Findings from Seven GAO 

Reports That Were Mandated by the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act

Page 17 GAO-14-285T 

• Passenger facility charges. We evaluated three alternative methods to 

the current ticket-based method of collecting passenger facility 

charges and found that each faces considerable technological 

challenges, for example, to implement.1

• Dense, continuous smoke in the cockpit. FAA uses a variety of 

approaches, including certifying airplane design and inspecting air 

carriers, to oversee procedures and technologies that prevent or 

mitigate the effects of dense, continuous smoke in the cockpit.

While none of the three 

methods that we evaluated are currently better than the existing 

collection method, it is possible that in the future some of these 

challenges will be reduced as technology advances or that airports 

might be willing to accept the additional costs and impose additional 

passenger burdens in return for an increase in their capital funding.

2

• Compensation for delayed baggage. According to DOT data, the 

number of mishandled baggage

We 

identified five procedures and technologies that FAA oversees: (1) 

certification standards for aircraft design that include smoke’s 

evacuation; (2) a requirement that air carriers provide protective 

breathing equipment that protects the flightcrew from the effects of 

smoke; (3) a requirement that air carriers’ pilot–training programs 

cover principles of emergency operations and emergency 

communications procedures; (4) a requirement that an FAA-approved 

emergency procedures checklist be provided by air carriers and used 

by their flight crewmembers; and (5) oversight of the Emergency 

Vision Assurance System, a device that provides a means to see 

during a dense, continuous smoke event, that FAA has approved for 

installation on several models of commercial airplanes.

3 reports has decreased since 2008 

when airlines first began charging for the first checked bag.4

 1

GAO, Alternative Methods for Collecting Airport Passenger Facility Charges, 

There 

are a number of factors that could contribute to this decline, such as a 

decline in the number of bags checked and improved baggage–

GAO-13-262R (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 14, 2013). 

2

GAO, Transportation: FAA Oversight of Procedures and Technologies to Prevent and 

Mitigate the Effects of Dense, Continuous Smoke in the Cockpit, GAO-13-551R 

(Washington, D.C.: June 4, 2013) 

3

A “mishandled baggage” report is a report filed with a carrier by or on behalf of a 

passenger who claims loss, delay, damage, or pilferage of baggage. A mishandledbaggage report may represent one or more mishandled bags. 

4

GAO, Delayed-Baggage Trends and Options for Compensating Passengers, 

GAO-12-804R (Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2012).

Appendix II: Key Findings from Seven GAO 

Reports That Were Mandated by the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act
Appendix II: Key Findings from Seven GAO 

Reports That Were Mandated by the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act

Page 18 GAO-14-285T 

handling processes; however, data limitations impeded further 

analysis.5

• Air Traffic Collegiate Training Initiative (CTI). We found that the costeffectiveness of the CTI schools depends on a number of cost 

elements that are currently unknown, including the upfront cost of 

developing new curriculums and how FAA implements training 

through the CTI schools, among other factors.

We described DOT’s options for and the impact of 

implementing minimum compensation standards for delayed 

baggage, which included (1) keeping current regulations, which, 

among other things, require compensation for reasonable expenses 

that result because of delay in the delivery of baggage; (2) 

reimbursing passengers for the checked baggage fee if the bag is 

delayed; and (3) implementing compensation standards based on the 

length of delay.

6

• FAA facility condition. While FAA has mechanisms to identify and 

mitigate safety deficiencies at FAA facilities and has taken actions to 

strengthen its capital planning process to help ensure its facilities are 

in good condition, our analysis of FAA’s statistical model for 

estimating the condition of uninspected terminal facilities found the 

model to be imprecise; it uses one variable—age of the facility—to 

estimate the facility’s condition.

In addition, we were 

not able to determine the potential effect of the alternative air–traffic–

controller–training approach through CTI schools on controller 

trainees; the concept would need further development before 

comparisons can be made about performance outcomes for such 

trainees under the current approach through the FAA Academy and 

the alternative approach through the CTI schools.

7

 5

DOT’s data do not distinguish between delayed baggage and other types of mishandled 

baggage, such as those that are lost, damaged, or pilfered. 

Furthermore, inaccuracies in FAA’s 

real–estate management database undermine its usefulness as a 

management tool to manage its real estate portfolio. We 

recommended that FAA take action to improve the precision of the 

methods it uses to estimate the conditions of uninspected terminal 

facilities and implement a plan to improve its database for tracking its 

inventory of real property assets, consistent with sound data–

collection practices.

6

GAO, Review of FAA’s Collegiate Training Initiative as Mandated in the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, GAO-12-996R (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 24, 2012).

7

GAO, FAA Facilities: Improved Condition Assessment Methods Could Better Inform 

Maintenance Decisions and Capital- Planning Efforts, GAO-13-757 (Washington, D.C.: 

Sept. 10, 2013). 
Appendix II: Key Findings from Seven GAO 

Reports That Were Mandated by the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act

Page 19 GAO-14-285T 

• National Mediation Board. We found that the National Mediation 

Board, which facilitates labor relations and oversees union elections in 

two key transportation sectors—railroads and airlines—through 

mediation and arbitration of labor disputes and overseeing union 

elections, has adapted to challenges presented by large union 

elections resulting from airline mergers and has implemented 

improvements such as online voting.8

• Airport-intercity passenger rail connectivity. Most major U.S. airports 

have some degree of physical proximity to intercity passenger rail 

stations; however, air-rail connectivity remains limited due to a variety 

of factors.

However, the board lacks some 

controls in key management areas that could risk its resources and its 

success such as having a formal mechanism for tracking resolution of 

findings and recommendations. We made a number of 

recommendations to improve the board’s planning and make the most 

effective use of its limited resources and also noted that Congress 

should consider authorizing an appropriate federal agency’s Office of 

Inspector General to provide additional oversight.

9

 8

GAO, National Mediation Board: Strengthening Planning and Controls Could Better 

Facilitate Rail and Air Labor Relations, 

We found that connectivity between these two modes may 

provide a range of mobility, economic, and environmental benefits, 

and while strategies exist to improve connectivity, the costs and tradeoffs of enhancing connectivity could be substantial.

GAO-14-5 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 3, 2013). 

9 GAO, Intermodal Transportation: A Variety of Factors Influence Airport-Intercity 

Passenger Rail Connectivity, GAO-13-691 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 2, 2013).
Appendix III: Status of Requirements for UAS 

Integration under the 2012 Act as of January 

2014

Page 20 GAO-14-285T 

Deadline FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requirement Status of action 

05/14/2012 Enter into agreements with appropriate government agencies to simplify the 

process for issuing Certificates of waiver or authorizations (COAs) or waivers for 

public UAS. 

In process–memorandum of 

agreement (MOA) with the 

Department of Defense (DOD) 

signed September of 2013; MOA 

with Department of Justice (DOJ) 

signed March 2013; MOA with 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA) in final 

coordination; MOA with Department 

of Interior (DOI) and National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) are still in 

draft. 

08/12/2012 Establish a program to integrate UAS into the national airspace at six test 

ranges. This program is to terminate 5 years after date of enactment. 

In process

08/12/2012 Develop an Arctic UAS operation plan and initiate a process to work with relevant 

federal agencies and national and international communities to designate 

permanent areas in the Arctic where small unmanned aircraft may operate 24 

hours per day for research and commercial purposes.

Completed

08/12/2012 Determine whether certain UAS can fly safely in the national airspace before the 

completion of the Act’s requirements for a comprehensive plan and rulemaking to 

safely accelerate the integration of civil UAS into the national airspace or the 

Act’s requirement for issuance of guidance regarding the operation of public UAS 

including operating a UAS with a COA or waiver. 

Completed 

11/10/2012 Expedite the issuance of a COA for public safety entities Completed

11/10/2012 Develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate integration of civil UAS into 

national airspace. 

Completed

11/10/2012 Issue guidance regarding operation of civil UAS to expedite COA process; 

provide a collaborative process with public agencies to allow an incremental 

expansion of access into the national airspace as technology matures and the 

necessary safety analysis and data become available and until standards are 

completed and technology issues are resolved; facilitate capability of public 

entities to develop and use test ranges; provide guidance on public entities’

responsibility for operation. 

Completed 

02/12/2013 Make operational at least one project at a test range. In-process

02/14/2013 Approve and make publically available a 5-year roadmap for the introduction of 

civil UAS into national airspace, to be updated annually. 

Completed

02/14/2013 Submit to Congress a copy of the comprehensive plan. Completed

08/14/2014 Publish in the Federal Register the Final Rule on small UAS. In process 

08/14/2014 Publish in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to implement 

recommendations of the comprehensive plan. 

None to date 

08/14/2014 Publish in the Federal Register an update to the Administration’s policy 

statement on UAS in Docket No. FAA-2006-25714. 

None to date 

09/30/2015 Achieve safe integration of civil UAS into the national airspace. In process 

Appendix III: Status of Requirements for 

UAS Integration under the 2012 Act as of 

January 2014
Appendix III: Status of Requirements for UAS 

Integration under the 2012 Act as of January 

2014

Page 21 GAO-14-285T 

Deadline FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requirement Status of action 

12/14/2015 Publish in the Federal Register a Final Rule to implement the recommendations 

of the comprehensive plan. 

None to date 

12/31/2015 Develop and implement operational and certification requirements for public UAS 

in national airspace. 

In process

02/14/2017 Report to Congress on the test ranges. None to date

Source: GAO analysis of FAA Modernization and Reform Act and FAA’s progress.
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 22 GAO-14-285T 

For further information on this testimony, please contact Gerald L. 

Dillingham, Ph.D., at (202) 512-2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov. In 

addition, contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and 

Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this statement. Individuals 

making key contributions to this testimony include Andrew Von Ah, 

Assistant Director; Mike Armes, Martha Chow; Geoff Hamilton; Dave 

Hooper; Daniel Hoy; Eric Hudson; Bert Japikse; Heather Krause, Sara 

Ann Moessbauer; Faye Morrison; Nalylee Padilla; Melissa Swearingen; 

and Jessica Wintfeld.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

(540272)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.