THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION -'-. '"· 

WASHINGTON, DC 20590 ·'·-·' .. 

The Honorable David B. McKinley 

U.S. House ofRepresentatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Congressman McKinley: 

November 19, 2014 

Thank you for your letter urging the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the 

_ ... ,' 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and 

the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to continue the ban on voice calls on all 

commercial aircraft, and to work collaboratively to address safety and security concerns raised 

by the potential introduction of other wireless capabilities before they are permitted in-flight. I 

appreciate the opportunity to provide you an update. 

As you recognize, concerns surrounding the use of mobile wireless devices on aircraft extend 

beyond the jurisdiction of DOT, which has authority over aviation consumer protection issues 

and safety issues. Other agencies, such as FCC, DHS, and DOJ, also have distinct areas of 

responsibilities with respect to the use of mobile devices for voice communications on aircraft. 

We are collaborating with those agencies on an ongoing basis, through an interagency task force 

convened by the FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. This task force is 

dedicated to identifying and responding to ongoing safety and security threats arising from the 

use of personal mobile wireless devices aboard aircraft. I look forward to our continued efforts 

with this task force. 

· At the same time, DOT is moving forward with its rulemaking on the use of mobile wireless 

devices for voice calls on aircraft. As your letter noted, DOT issued an Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), seeking comment on whether DOT should ban voice calls on 

commercial aircraft, and if so, to what extent. The DOT has evaluated the comments received 

in response to the ANPRM and is in the process of drafting a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM). Although there is no fmal determination as to what the NPRM will propose, we 

understand the importance of this rulemaking and agree that the use of mobile communications 

devices to make voice calls raises a number of concerns. 

A copy of your letter and this response will be placed in the public docket for the rulemaking 

(DOT-OST-2014-0002). I have sent a similar response to each cosigner of your letter. If I can 

provide further information or assistance, please feel free to call me. 

··,-;. 
llf £ 

1Un.siiiH~1h:nt, 

Honorable Anthony Foxx 

Seaetary 

Department ofT ransportation 

1200 Ne'>\. Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington. DC :20590 

Honorabk Jeh Johnson 

Secretary 

Department of Homeland Security 

Washington. D.C. 20528 

Honorable Eric Holder 

Attorney· General 

Dcpartmcn! of J usti cc 

950 Pennsylvania An~nue 1'\\V 

\Vashington. DC 20530-2001 

Honorable Tom Whcdcr 

Chairman 

Federal Communications Commission 

445 12th St. S\\. 

Washington. DC 20554 

September 22. 20 1-t 

Dear Honorable Fnxx, Juhns1m. Holder, and Wheeler: 

While continually emerging \Virclcss techm)!ogics bring many· benefits to society. there arc 

signiticant concerns about the sal'dy. security and cmnliJii implications of potential \'oicc and 

wireless kdmology use on commercial aircraft. \\\,.·urge you tl> continue the ban on YOice calb 

on all C1.1111mcrcial uircmft and bdieve that your agencies must also \\'l)rk collaborati\·d y to 

address safety and security concerns raised by the potential introduction of other wireless 

capabilities before they arc pcnnitted in-llight. While we support advancements in tcchnnlogy 

that have provided airline passengers \Vith the ability to conduct business. commtmicate with 

flunily or choose their own entertainment options. we believe that a multi-agency. 

comprehensive analysis should he undertaken t\l address any potential risks so as to ensure 

passengers and crcwmembcr safety. 

\\'c arc extremely concerned that tht: Federal Communications Commission tFCC) has offered a 

proposal to allow the use of wireless communication devices on commercial nights that docs not 

fully address these safety and security issues. nor docs it scem cuordinatcd with your (lther 

agencies which ha\;e a role in assessing flight safety issues. At the same time, the Department l.)f 

Transportation has only st.1ught comments on \vhethcr allowing in-tlight ,·oice calls would be 
September 22, 20 14 

Page 2 

disruptive and unfair to passengers, for which the agency intends to 1ssue a mlemaking to 

address the issue by year's end. 

Passengers making voice calls during flight could impact the ability of crewmembers - flight 

attendants and pilots - to perform their jobs, keep passengers safe and the cabin environment 

calm. Arguments in an aircraft cabin already start over mundane issues, like seat selection, 

reclining seats and overhead bin space, and the volume and pervasiveness of voice 

communications would only senle to exacerbate and escalate these disputes. The nature of an 

aircraft cabin would make it impossible for passengers to remove themselves from loud or 

unwanted conversations and disputes may ensue. Instead of focusing on required safety-related 

tasks, flight attendants may be forced to intervene in or mediate disputes between passengers on 

appropriate content and volume of voice calls, thus distracting their attention from other 

passengers and job responsibilities. Additionally, when noise and distraction levels rise because 

of talking passengers, the ability to hear important safety announcements, either from the cockpit 

or cabin, win be impaired and crucial information may be missed. Given these potential dangers, 

further study is needed to fully assess the safety and security issues that may stern from allowing 

voice communications on aircraft. · 

The use of \Vireless communication devices should also be subject to a multi-agency review to 

inquire upon possible safety or security effects to the aircraft or flight Concerns have been 

expressed tl1at wireless technologies can cause radio interference, can be used to tamper with 

avionics or flight controls, or could be used to interfere with other passengers devices. The 

potential also exists for wireless devices to be used to hide or trigger on~board explosives. The 

lessons of the 9/11 terrorist attacks dictated that federal regulators work together to stop 

vulnerabilities before they can be exploited. \Ve believe it is prudent for your agencies to engage 

in such a multi-agency review before wireless technologies are more broadly permitted for use 

on commercial aircraft. 

Finally, federal regulators must ensure that an Airborne Access System capable of providing 

broadband access will not cause interference with aircraft operating systems. As access to inflight broadband becomes more common, efforts wiH be made to prov-ide stronger connectivity 

in order to allow passengers greater access to over-the-top communications and streaming media. 

While this innovation is laudable, it is not without risk. There are similar concerns about 

passenger comfort and the potential for disputes, as well as the possibility that enhanced 

connectivity could be used illicitly to override or interfere with flight control systems. 

Accordingly, efforts must be made to assess and eliminate the security and safety risks that may 

arise as broadband equipment is upgraded on commercial nights. 

The various concerns raised above faH in the jurisdictions of various agencies. We believe it 

would be shortsighted and potentially harmful for each of your agencies to strictly analyze this 

issue based on specific jurisdictional guidelines, as it appears the FCC and DOT have currently 

done. By working together, the government can fully assess the comprehensive impact these 

proposals would have on passengers and crewmembers, as well as the safety and security of U.S. 

aviation. 
SL'ph:mbtT 22. 20! 4 

Pag~ 3 

ln light orth~se serious t:,mccrns. we respectfully urge your departments and agency to continue 

the han \)!1 voice calls and to work collaborathcly to ensure th:.lt these issues and all other 

pott.:ntial rami ficati(1ns arc fully addressed. 

Sincerely. 

f Congress 

l\kmber of C\mgn:ss 

1 ~ 6:-, 

))4-t ~~~- DOl\ 't'OUKG GENE GREEN 

l\lember of Congress :-Icm her of Congress 

/..., ·['7 • 11 

)~dtfru f:(tA,.vlA"C-·t {}£1/L-·Vl/J ... -trvL ,_.. /. 

EDDIE -BER~·ic;·iTJo{I:\SON 

Member of Congress Member of Congress 

~kmber of Congress 
:\D:\\1 KI?\ZI?\GER 

\\kmbcr of Cnngrcss 

1\kmb~r pf Congn:ss 

1\kmbcr of Cungrcss 

H<¥ 

BETO CfROl'RKF 

\kmhcr (lr ( 'nngrc::~s 

--···~· ....... 

ELEA?\OR HOL\1ES t\ORTO:\ 

Member ofCongrcss 

.. 

MIKE HO?\D;\ 

\kmbd pf CtJngrcss 
j, /. ,1_/ ,/•/7/ 

t· -~;:.:r;i'\Lk:_:~~-:--

KEITH ELLISON 

:'vi ember nf Congress 

__\...____ 

~ dfau~ •••..................•... 'fA~ ALAN LOWENTHAL 

Member ofCongn:ss 

' ' '\~~:{i:;/1 ~ ~ ! 

JAiviES'r~ rvf~c§ovERN···· 

rv1embcr of Congress 

ED PERUviUTTER 

1v1embcr of Congress 

\ 

s~ptcmbcr 22. ::'.014 

Page 5 

!vlcmbcr of Congress 

fvlcmbcr of Congress 
NICK J. RAHALL II 

l\kmbcr of Congress 

RICK LARSEN 

iv1ember of Congress 

!\[ember of Congress 

DEREK KfUv1ER 

rv·I;:mber of Congress 

Septc:mb..:r 22. 2\ll.ot 

iv1embcr of Congress 

f 

i\kmbcr ni'Congnfss 

RICK NOLAN 

i\Icmber of Congress 

PAULTONKO 

Member of C\)ngrcss 

tvlcmbcr of Congress 

DOl\:\A F. EDWARDS 

l\1ember of Congress 

DEBBIE WASSERMA?\ SCHULTZ 

t'v1ember of Congress 

:v1cmber of Cnngress 

6 
ALCEE L. HASTINGS 

!Vleinbcr of Congress 

ANN KIRKPA TRfCK 

!\·!ember of Congress 

MIKE QUfGLEY 

Member of Congress 

Member of Congress 

S<:pt.:mbcr 22. 20 l..f 

Pag<.: 7 

-~------.-.., ........ . 

HAKEEM ~fEFFERIES 

l\!cmbcr of Congress 

CAROL SIIEA-PORTER 

:vkmbcr of Congress 

ivlcmber of Congress 

f'v1ctrlbcr of Congress 

CORRINE BROWN 

i'Acmbcr of Congress 
S:.:ptcmh.:r 22. ::uP 

Pagt: i\