PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Space.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2016
Federal Aviation R&D Reauthorization Act of 2016
This bill reauthorizes the civil aviation research and development (R&D) program of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) through FY2018.
Department of Transportation (DOT) shall:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
arrange with the National Academies for a comprehensive research survey and strategy over the next decade for FAA civil aviation activities, and
develop a Strategic and Integrated Research Plan for an R&D program reflecting survey results.
DOT shall also:
ensure that FAA cybersecurity R&D is constantly updated to reflect the evolving nature of cyber risks and threats, and
develop an agencywide threat model.
The GAO shall review:
the effectiveness of the six FAA unmanned aircraft (drone) system test sites and the opportunities for coordinating and integrating the research at them with research by the Center of Excellence on Unmanned Aircraft Systems; and
federal government research on aircraft noise levels and its use to inform the DOT noise evaluation processes, adjustments to noise metrics, and development of noise abatement procedures.
DOT shall:
develop an R&D strategy to inform any potential regulatory action regarding the safe integration of evolving drone systems into the National Airspace System,
hold at least one workshop to discuss the status of R&D on enhancing general aviation safety,
develop a research plan on safety risk assessment methods for development of airport design standards, and
develop a plan to implement standards for aircraft cabin air contaminants.
The GAO shall review the role of FAA's Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee in advising about:
the organization, management, and budgetary structure of R&D programs across FAA, and
both near-term budget planning and long-term strategic planning for the comprehensive FAA R&D portfolio.
DOT shall also arrange for an independent external study to identify the implications that a potential nongovernment U.S. air traffic control system could have on FAA's R&D activities.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Eddie Bernice [D-TX-30] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Space.
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4464 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4464 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4464 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4464 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.