The Honorable
Norman Mineta
Transportation Secretary
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 7th Street, S.W
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Mr.
Secretary:
We write to express our grave concern about the recent conduct of
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in lobbying Congress for
the authority to privatize America's air traffic control (ATC)
system.
Although the FAA has said that it had no intention of privatizing
ATC functions, it worked behind closed doors to gain authority to
replace federal controllers at 69 airport towers with contract
employees of private companies. Then, in an apparent private deal
with the Alaska delegation, the FAA agreed to be prohibited from
privatizing Alaska airports. How, Mr. Secretary, can you defend a
system that has one standard for Alaska, and another for the other
49 states? If privatization did not pose a threat to safety and
efficiency, why would the experienced legislators of the Alaska
delegation bother to exempt their own airports?
And now, in an effort to win Congressional approval of the
conference report on Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization
Act ("Conference Report"), the FAA appears ready to use a similar
scheme toexempt towers in other states. It seems the Administration
has different standards for air traffic control towers depending on
the votes the Administration needs to pass the Conference Report. It
has recently come to light in a report in the Tulsa World that the
FAA has promised Senator Nickles that the Riverside Airport control
tower in his home state of Oklahoma will not be privatized. It is
not surprising that Oklahomans are concerned about privatization,
and that concern was reflected in the support the Lautenberg
amendment received from Senator Inhofe. The Administration will need
Senator Inhofe, and others of the 11 Republicans who supported the
Lautenberg amendment, to have a change of heart in order to pass its
plan to privatize air traffic services. Once again we ask, if
privatization poses no threats to safety and efficiency, why are
members of Congress demanding they be exempted from the program?
This is not the first instance of improper behavior on behalf of the
Administration on this issue. Shortly before Senate consideration of
the Lautenberg amendment in June, Administration officials sent a
factually incorrect e-mail to many Senate offices (except that of
Senator Lautenberg) in a failed attempt to lobby against the
Lautenberg amendment. The e-mail claimed the scope of the proposed
Lautenberg provision was much broader than it actually was. This
instance was chronicled in a hearing by the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, on July 8.
Safe and efficient air travel for all Americans is a non-partisan
commitment from both the House and the Senate. The FAA is charged
with protecting the safety of air travel, not cutting political
deals-especially when those deals appear to be based on no sound
safety or economic policy, but rather political calculations.
To that point, we are asking you to instruct the FAA Administrator
to report to Congress on any and all arrangements to exempt FAA-run
control towers from being contracted out. We assure you that failure
to report fully and promptly on this matter will lead to a loss in
confidence among ourselves and our colleagues in the Congress in the
leadership of the FAA.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
______________________ |
____________________ |
Frank R.
Lautenberg
U.S.
Senator
|
James L.
Oberstar
Ranking Democratic Member
U.S.
House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure |
|