[Senate Hearing 111-379]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-379
FAA REAUTHORIZATION: NEXTGEN
AND THE BENEFITS OF MODERNIZATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 25, 2009
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
52-164 PDF WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas,
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts Ranking
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
BILL NELSON, Florida JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
TOM UDALL, New Mexico MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
MARK WARNER, Virginia MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
MARK BEGICH, Alaska
Ellen L. Doneski, Chief of Staff
James Reid, Deputy Chief of Staff
Bruce H. Andrews, General Counsel
Christine D. Kurth, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel
Paul Nagle, Republican Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, JIM DeMINT, South Carolina,
Chairman Ranking Member
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BILL NELSON, Florida ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
MARK WARNER, Virginia
MARK BEGICH, Alaska
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 25, 2009................................... 1
Statement of Senator Dorgan...................................... 1
Statement of Senator DeMint...................................... 2
Statement of Senator Lautenberg.................................. 3
Statement of Senator Rockefeller................................. 5
Statement of Senator Hutchison................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Statement of Senator Begich...................................... 7
Statement of Senator Johanns..................................... 7
Statement of Senator Brownback................................... 57
Prepared statement........................................... 57
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 63
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 65
Witnesses
Hank Krakowski, Chief Operating Officer, Air Traffic
Organization, Federal Aviation Administration.................. 8
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D. Director, Physical Infrastructure
Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.................. 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Joe Kolshak, Senior Vice President--Operations, United Airlines
on Behalf of the Air Transport Association of America.......... 26
Prepared statement........................................... 28
Dale Wright, Director of Safety and Technology, National Air
Traffic Controllers Association................................ 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
T. K. Kallenbach, Vice President, Marketing and Product
Management, Honeywell Aerospace................................ 43
Prepared statement........................................... 45
Appendix
Letter, dated March 24, 2009, from Joseph D. Gebhardt, Gebhardt &
Associates, LLP, to Hon. Byron L. Dorgan....................... 69
Response to written questions submitted to Hank Krakowski by:
Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV.................................. 70
Hon. Bill Nelson............................................. 72
Hon. Mark Warner............................................. 73
Hon. Mark Begich............................................. 74
Hon. John Ensign............................................. 77
Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Gerald L.
Dillingham by:
Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV.................................. 78
Hon. Mark Begich............................................. 78
Hon. John Ensign............................................. 79
Response to written questions submitted to Joe Kolshak by:
Hon. Mark Begich............................................. 80
Hon. John Ensign............................................. 81
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
Dale Wright.................................................... 81
Response to written question submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to T.
K. Kallenbach.................................................. 82
FAA REAUTHORIZATION: NEXTGEN
AND THE BENEFITS OF MODERNIZATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and
Security,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a.m. in
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Byron L.
Dorgan, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Dorgan. I'm going to call the hearing to order.
I'm Senator Dorgan, the Chairman of the Subcommittee on
Aviation. I'm joined by Senator DeMint and Senator Johanns, and
others will join us shortly.
This is a hearing to discuss FAA reauthorization, but
especially to discuss the issue of modernization. We will have
other hearings and discuss other aspects of the reauthorization
bill, which we want to work on and we want to be successful in
moving through the U.S. Senate and getting a bill to the
President in this Congress. But for now we will be discussing
modernization.
``Modernization,'', is kind of a big old term, but most of
us understand the need to modernize our system. We understand
that there are opportunities to move toward what is called
NextGen. And the pace and the price are always at odds here
with respect to implementing next-generation systems, but we
believe very strongly--I certainly do, and I know my colleagues
do, as well--that we need to make progress. Some are talking
about NextGen 2020, 2025. In my judgment, that's a pace that is
too slow, and we just need to make substantially more progress
at a much better pace than that. And so, this will be the first
hearing in which we discuss that.
Let me just make a point. We invited Dale Wright, from the
National Air Traffic Controllers Association, and I know that
he will want to talk about other things, because there are
other issues with the air traffic controllers. But, I've asked
Mr. Wright, today, to talk about modernization, and he's
prepared to do that. We'll have another hearing on the subject
of the air traffic controller issues.
We have Mr. Hank Krakowski, the FAA Chief Operating Officer
of the Air Traffic Organization. Hank, thank you for being with
us. Gerald Dillingham, who is the Director of the Physical
Infrastructure Issues at the GAO. Mr. Dillingham, welcome. Dale
Wright, who I have just mentioned, Director of Safety and
Technology at the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.
Joe Kolshak, Senior Vice President of Operations at United
Airlines. Welcome. And T. K. Kallenbach, Vice President of
Marketing at Honeywell Aerospace. We appreciate the five of you
being willing to provide statements today about this issue of
modernization and NextGen.
I was at a meeting a while ago and someone was describing
that the new technology, which I'm well aware of because we
have a couple of kids in college--everybody has a cell phone
these days. They advertise technologies where parents can use
GPS systems and, with the consent of the one telephone, that
perhaps is in the possession of your child, a parent can know
exactly where the child is, because you can track it with your
own cell phone. You can track the location of up to 20 of your
acquaintances, provided they allow you to do that.
Well, it is interesting that a teenager with a cell phone
can track the exact whereabouts of 20 friends, and we can't
track the exact whereabouts of an airplane, because we're using
an old system. We generally know where they are--I'm not
suggesting that the system doesn't understand where an airplane
is flying, but it is the case that we are not using the more
sophisticated capability from the GPS system. NextGen would
allow us to do that. It would allow us to have a greater margin
of safety, greater efficiencies with respect to the way we fly
and the more direct routes that we fly, and less air pollution,
certainly beneficial for the environment. All of these things
are possible, and they are possible now with today's
technology.
We need standards that are developed. We need a
determination to move in this direction. We need training. We
need equipment. But, the fact is, this is not some 20-years-
from-now-sci-fi application. We have to decide that here's
where we're going to move with respect to modernization of the
FAA, and move there with some dispatch. 2025 or 2020 is too
long a time frame, in my judgment.
So, having said all of that, this will be the first hearing
on modernization. We will, as I said, write legislation in the
Committee. Senator Rockefeller, the Chairman of our Committee,
and the Ranking Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, are both very
interested in this subject. I expect a lot of cooperation from
members of the Committee.
Let me call on the Ranking Member, Senator DeMint.
Senator DeMint, thank you. And I'm pleased once again that
we've joined on a subcommittee. We were the Chair and Ranking
Member of a subcommittee, previously, on this Committee.
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM DeMINT,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
Senator DeMint. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And the Chairman has noted that I am sitting to his left
today, so I have moderated my views.
[Laughter.]
Senator DeMint. Thank you. Well, I came to Congress 10
years ago, and I was on the Transportation Committee in the
House, and we were talking about the desperate need to
modernize the FAA at that time. And I'm afraid we haven't made
near the progress that we had hoped.
Modernization is much more critical today as we see
congestion, not only in the air, but on the roads, and stress
in our whole transportation system across the country. So, this
time I hope we can actually get something done, and do it the
right way.
As the Chairman mentioned, there's a lot at stake, not just
reducing delays, but also reducing fuel consumption by being
more efficient in how we manage the airplanes. There's a kind
of new industry developing in general aviation. We're seeing,
in our areas, air taxis and other ways that people can use
smaller airports to move around, which will create new
challenges for the FAA and air traffic control.
As the Chairman mentioned, GPS and other new technologies
offer what appear to be inexpensive and very good ways to begin
to track things. My concern is that because the government
moves so slowly, by the time we got something done, the
equipment we decided to use would be antiquated. It's like when
I buy a new BlackBerry, the one I decide to get is antiquated,
and everyone else is using a newer one.
But, we need to figure out how we can be flexible enough as
a country to constantly improve and upgrade technology in a way
that doesn't leave us with an antiquated system 10 years from
now, if we do modernize.
So, there are a lot of challenges in front of us, but I do
appreciate the five witnesses who are here who will get us
started with, hopefully, the right ideas on how to move ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator DeMint, thank you very much.
We're joined by the Chairman of the full Committee, Senator
Rockefeller. Senator Rockefeller, I just described, in
brilliant words----
The Chairman. I heard. I listened.
Senator Dorgan.--how terrific you are----
The Chairman. Yes, I----
Senator Dorgan.--and how much you've worked on this subject
already, and what we're going to do on this Committee.
The Chairman. I know. Do you want to go over it? Do you
want to do it again?
[Laughter.]
Senator Lautenberg. If it wouldn't be too much of an
imposition, I've got a meeting--another Committee starting in 5
minutes, if I----
The Chairman. Be my guest.
Senator Dorgan. I'd just call on Senator Lautenberg.
STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
Senator Lautenberg. Thanks very much, Senator Rockefeller
and our Chairman today, Senator Dorgan.
And I start off, Senator Dorgan, by offering our best
wishes and thoughts about your State and the difficulty that we
see you going through, and we hope that you and the citizens of
your State of North Dakota will be able to muster the energy
and the resources to get things moving.
It's noted that 2007 was one of the worst years on record
for flight delays. And I appreciate the fact that Senator
Rockefeller, Chairman of the committee, is permitting me to
jump in ahead of time, but I have another committee hearing.
One in four flights was late. And I have the opportunity to
test the system on a regular basis, because, though New Jersey
is not too far away, we're lulled into thinking that if we go
by air, it's going to be a shorter trip. I've found out it
isn't. I got on a plane Thursday night to LaGuardia. I live
midway between LaGuardia Airport and Newark Airport. They
closed the door on the airplane, and the pilot almost
instantaneously announced the fact that there was a 2-hour
delay. And I could hear the people scratching at the windows,
wanting to get out of there. But, we were imprisoned for the
next 2 hours. But, we had little snacks, one a person.
[Laughter.]
Senator Lautenberg. Newark Liberty International is one of
the most delayed airports in the country. These delays come
with a terrible cost that translates into losses of nearly $10
billion each year to our economy.
And there are many reasons that our air travelers are
burdened with delays. The central reason is our outdated air
traffic control system. When I arrived here, in 1983, I came
out of the computer business, and the first thing that I noted
was that the FAA had an antiquated computer system, really
rudimentary. And the fact of the matter is that our company,
which is a large computer user, had discarded the idea of
trying to keep these things, because the maintenance was a
higher cost than going out and tossing them out the window. So,
it's been an old situation here, and we want to improve it.
And, as the Chairman knows, our air traffic system is
basically the same system that we used in the 1960s. It's
simply not equipped for the massive amounts of air traffic that
we have today.
So, the need for the update is clear. The way that we
modernize it requires careful spending, planning, and smart
spending. And I come, as I said, from the private sector, and I
know that upgrading technology requires resources, time, and
constant oversight. One of the things that I've also learned in
my business experience, and we've seen it here, is that if you
try to take a massive problem and solve it all in one fell
swoop, it's very difficult. Very often we have to turn to
modular systems. And we've tried to repair the system, upgrade
the system twice with some of America's best companies, spent
billions of dollars, and had no results for our efforts, except
less money. The FAA needs to get new technology on our towers
and on our runways, and it needs a plan with clear benefits for
the flying public.
Now, while we modernize, we cannot neglect air travel's
immediate needs. Our air traffic controllers are retiring in
droves. The FAA is not replacing them fast enough, and has
always resisted getting people into the training loop. There
are nearly 2,000 fewer controllers than we had in 2002. It
takes several years to fully train new controllers, so the FAA
needs to get moving with a plan to hire and train a new
generation of controllers.
And I'm also hopeful that the Obama Administration and the
FAA will reach a long overdue collective bargaining agreement
with our controllers so that we can return to the era of
cooperation and collaboration that will best serve the flying
public.
Mr. Chairman, the FAA and our Nation's airports will also
need to get moving to upgrade our runways to prevent overruns.
Runway incursions are listed by the NTSB as a major safety
concern, and so it should be, because the forecast for
incursions is mind-boggling. This year, I'm going to continue
to push for comprehensive runway safety legislation to address
these and other problems.
And I close with an observation. Mr. Chairman and fellow
Committee members, one way to improve air traffic flow is
highspeed rail. And if we could get that going, as well, it
would eliminate so much travel by air between short distances.
I look forward to hearing from our panel. I'm sorry that I
have to go to another committee, and I appreciate the
indulgence of my colleagues.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Lautenberg, thank you very much.
Senator Rockefeller?
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, let me say how proud I am that you're
Chairman of this Subcommittee. Any Subcommittee that you chair
is bound to be effective, is destined to be effective. And you
will do the same with this.
And you have a big chore, in terms of air traffic control.
I don't think of NextGen, really, in terms of technology, I
think about it in terms of people. Obviously it's expensive.
Obviously we need cooperation between the different elements
that are in the air. It's obviously slowing down and costing
Americans hundreds of millions of dollars because it's so
ancient. We--if we're going to have a national aviation system,
we might as well be able to route the aviation system
intelligently, efficiently, and quickly. And, as I like to say,
I'd very much like to catch up with Mongolia on our air traffic
control system, but we haven't been able to do that yet.
The challenge I want to pose to the witnesses today, and to
the aviation industry, is to find a way to work together to
make this happen. It's no secret that the aviation industry is
in two categories, and there has got to be a way for them to
work together so that we can afford to pay the cost of both
keeping an analog system in place while we build a GPS ground-
based system.
So, simply put, we cannot afford to fail.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Rockefeller, thank you very much.
Are there others who wish to make an opening statement?
Senator Lautenberg had asked for special consideration; he
had to leave. But, I'd be happy to----
Senator Hutchison. Yes.
Senator Dorgan. If we could limit them to 2 minutes, I'd
appreciate that.
Senator Hutchison?
STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS
Senator Hutchison. Senator Rockefeller and I worked so hard
last year to get an FAA reauthorization bill through, I am very
hopeful that you all will be more successful than we were.
NextGen is, of course, the key component for us to go forward
with an FAA reauthorization bill.
Senator Rockefeller and I had an amendment ready for the
stimulus that would have accelerated the use of the precision
approaches across the country and given us a real head-start.
Unfortunately, we weren't able to get that in the final
package, but it is something that would be a legitimate use of
our stimulus money, because, of course, it will create jobs and
it will begin the process.
But, I will just say that, as we move forward, we are going
to need the buy-in of all of the components of the air traffic
control system in order to find the right solutions for the
funding and the implementation of NextGen. So, I certainly look
forward to working with everyone in this room and on our
Committee to get a good bill put forward. The one that we had
last year was bipartisan and agreed to by all concerned, and I
hope that will be the basis for the bill that we would use,
going forward, for FAA reauthorization.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Hutchison follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, U.S. Senator from
Texas
Thank you Senator Dorgan, I would like to welcome both you and
Senator DeMint to your new positions as Chairman and Ranking Member of
the Aviation Subcommittee. I look forward to working with both of you
as we move forward with the FAA Reauthorization process. I am
especially hopeful we can continue to move forward in a bipartisan
manner and develop a consensus bill we can all strongly support.
I am also pleased we are starting out the FAA Reauthorization
process and discussing the importance and benefits of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System or NextGen. I believe that NextGen
should be the centerpiece of our FAA proposal. We need to give the
agency the tools and resources it needs to make NextGen a reality.
I am very concerned that when the economy rebounds, the air traffic
control system will not be able to handle the accompanying rebound in
air travel.
The investments needed for NextGen are exactly the type of
infrastructure projects our country needs to create jobs and
opportunities that will last not just for a few years, but for a few
decades.
We have a very complex aviation system that calls for a
sophisticated and well organized solution. The benefits of increased
efficiency and expanded capacity, along with critical safety
enhancements and a reduction of the overall industry environmental
footprint should be enough of a ``carrot'' to entice interest and
support for the effort.
The FAA is moving away from planning phases and toward
implementation of NextGen technologies. We know what we can, and need
to do, in the short-term; so let's put the infrastructure in place.
The industry can then follow suit and complete the transition.
Chairman Rockefeller and I had an amendment to the stimulus bill that
accelerated the deployment of ADS-B ground stations by 2 years and
accelerated the use of precision approaches across the country.
That amendment ultimately was not accepted into the final package,
but it was a move in the right direction and a signal that we are
serious about improving this system. This hearing is also important
because the FAA is starting a new era of modernization with NextGen.
The FAA, unfortunately, has a long history of mishandling long-term
capital projects, but as we move into the implementation phase of
NextGen, the FAA has a tremendous opportunity to change that
reputation.
The FAA will need help though.If industry is serious about NextGen
then they need to coalesce behind the idea and they need to help find
solutions.
I look forward to starting that process today.I welcome our panel
and look forward to the testimony.
Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Hutchison, thank you very much. I
did describe, at the start of this, the work you have done with
Senator Rockefeller, and I think that accomplished a great deal
in setting the foundation for all of this, and we appreciate
that.
Senator Begich?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Begich. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and
thank you for the opportunity to be part of this Subcommittee.
I'll be very brief, because I'm looking forward to the
testimony of the folks that are here today.
There's no place like Alaska when it comes to aviation, to
say the least. With the recent volcanic eruptions of Mt.
Redoubt, our cities and communities have experienced exactly
what happens when aviation is interrupted.
Some interesting aviation statistics I always like to throw
out there: in Alaska, we have 6 times more pilots and 16 times
more planes per capita than any other place in the country.
The NextGen technology that we'll be talking about today is
of strong interest to my constituents. To help combat a high
aviation accident rate, in 2001, the Capstone Program made
Alaska one of the first states to deploy and implement some of
the advanced navigation technology used in NextGen at a trial
level. The Capstone Program demonstrated a 47 percent reduction
in the aviation accident rate of Capstone-avionics equipped
aircraft compared to non-equipped aircraft in southwest Alaska.
The NextGen technology that we are discussing this morning will
not only increase efficiency, but it will save lives. It is
important to upgrade our air traffic systems, because as we
know firsthand in Alaska how valuable it is.
I'm looking forward to the testimony, I'm looking forward
to doing whatever I can on this Subcommittee, as well as the
full Committee, in helping to make sure the NextGen system gets
into place as soon as possible. As we know from the Capstone
Program in Alaska, we have seen the impacts in a very positive
way.
So, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to this
Subcommittee.
Senator Dorgan. Thank you.
Senator Johanns?
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE JOHANNS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Johanns. Just very briefly. Mr. Chairman, thanks
for putting this together. I look forward to the testimony.
And, gentlemen, thank you for being here.
Just to kind of cue you up, if I could, in terms of what
I'm interested in, as a new member, is of course cost--it has
already been mentioned. What is this going to cost? Second,
timing. And that's been mentioned also, but I'll just
underscore it. What do you think the realistic timeline is? And
then, the third thing is a very realistic assessment of what
the system will do. I don't want to overpromise this. I don't
want to tell people that all of a sudden the world is going to
be dramatically better and different, if it's not. So, I would
like to hear, once it's up and running, once this investment
has been made, once we have worked our way through the timing
issues, how will we know that this system is up and running?
How will it improve the lives of the people that are in the
system, the passengers, the pilots, the air traffic
controllers? So, that's what I want to hear about, I hope, in
your testimonies, is some testimony on those three items--cost,
timing, and capability of the system.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Johanns, thank you very much.
This morning we will hear from the first witness, Hank
Krakowski, who is the FAA Chief Operating Officer.
And, Hank, you and I have had some experience working
together, and I appreciate your work very much. Why don't you
proceed.
We will ask that the entire statements of all of the
witnesses be made a part of the permanent record, and we would
ask all of the witnesses to summarize.
Mr. Krakowski?
STATEMENT OF HANK KRAKOWSKI, CHIEF OPERATING
OFFICER, AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION, FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Krakowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
To your first statement, I just spent 2 days in Colorado
Springs talking with DOD and the other Federal agencies on
unmanned aircraft, and I think the work that we did over the
past 2 days assures our ability to deliver on the promise up in
North Dakota on time next year.
Senator Dorgan. If we might--just so the audience
understands what you're talking about--we're talking about
commercial aviation, general aviation, and then, particularly
with respect to the military and homeland security, there are
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, UAV. In order to integrate them into
our airspace and provide margins of safety for everyone else
that's flying, there needs to be new rules, new regulations,
and that's where NextGen will play a significant role. So,
thank you for that.
Mr. Krakowski. It's true that NextGen and the Custom and
Border Protection are flying a Predator today over the
territory in preparation for possible recovery operations
later, if needed.
Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you very much for asking the FAA to update
you on the current state of our modernization efforts.
We have solid progress to report, as is reflected in the
GAO's removal of our air traffic control modernization efforts
from the high-risk list. As positive as this news is, we strive
for continuous improvement. The cornerstone of the
modernization effort is NextGen, and it is designed to increase
safety, reduce delays, and expand capacity while reducing the
environmental impact of aviation.
Making improvements to our current hardwired system will
not achieve these aspirations. NextGen will provide
flexibility, scalability, and, more importantly,
predictability, to better serve the changing needs of the
aviation community who uses our system.
Since 2000, the peak year of air traffic, operations today
are down about 17 percent, yet in places like New York, New
Jersey, and Philadelphia, congestion and delays continue in our
busiest airspace and airports. These landlocked, closely spaced
airports are limited in their physical ability to expand.
In contrast, last year we initiated three new runways, in
Seattle, Chicago, and Washington Dulles. We are already
experiencing significant delay reduction and capacity relief at
O'Hare. More runways are planned, with a new one in Charlotte
next year and at O'Hare a few years later.
Where new runways are not viable, NextGen fundamentals,
using existing technology, do offer some immediate relief. As a
result of NextGen research, last year we published a national
order that allows us to safely reduce separation between
aircraft on parallel runways that are spaced closely to each
other: Boston, Cleveland, Philadelphia, St. Louis, and Seattle,
notably. In Seattle, we're watching low-visibility operations
increase by more than 70 percent, in terms of delay reduction
and capacity.
Another building block for NextGen are procedures we can
use today, such as RNAV, Area Navigation, and RNP, Required
Navigation Performance, providing increased throughput and
delay reduction. Properly equipped aircraft can use these
procedures now, with more procedures and techniques being
developed. This issue of proper equipage is critical; and,
specifically, we're talking about GPS.
A faster realization of NextGen benefits is directly linked
to how quickly the operators can equip their aircraft, and we
can do this in a targeted way. As such, the FAA has asked the
RTCA Committee to establish a Next-Generation Implementation
Task Force. They are working to provide recommendations by
August of this year, on what areas of technology and procedures
to concentrate on and where to deploy them in the next 5 to 8
years. Nearly every manufacturer, airline, airplane operator,
and labor organization are working members of this rapid-fire
task force.
While we transition to NextGen, it is imperative that we
ensure safety in the system, so we have other interim issues to
do, such as runway status lights, which alert pilots or
vehicles if the runway is occupied before they actually occupy
the runway. We have 22 airports slated for runway status lights
by 2011.
Last, the FAA needs the entire community of aviation to
make NextGen a reality, sooner rather than later. This includes
airports, airlines, pilots, manufacturers, academia, and, of
course, the air traffic control work force, especially the
controllers.
Secretary LaHood made it very clear that resolving the
labor disputes so we can have a better operating environment
with our controllers as we build NextGen is important, and I
look very much forward to working with the new Administrator on
clearing that path forward.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Krakowski follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hank Krakowski, Chief Operating Officer,
Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration
Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the current state
of the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) efforts on air traffic
control modernization. We have recently made some great strides in this
area, and I am happy to report that in recognition of that, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently removed the FAA's air
traffic control modernization program from its High Risk List, its
biennial update of Federal programs, policies, and operations that are
at ``high risk'' for waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement or in need
of broad-based transformation.
The GAO added FAA air traffic control modernization to the High
Risk List in 1995 due to cost overruns, schedule delays, and
performance shortfalls in the FAA attempts to modernize its air traffic
control system. However, the GAO has found that the FAA is making
progress in ``addressing most of the root cause of its past problems.''
The GAO concluded that the FAA's efforts ``have yielded results,
including deploying new systems across the country and incurring fewer
cost overruns.''
As positive as this news is, we are not resting on our laurels. As
you know, at the heart of the FAA's modernization is the Next
Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). NextGen is a wide-
ranging transformation of the entire national air transportation system
to meet future demand and support the economic viability of the system
while reducing delays, improving safety, and protecting the
environment. NextGen will change the way the system operates--reducing
congestion, noise, and emissions, expanding capacity and improving the
passenger experience. NextGen is a complex, multilayered, evolutionary
process of developing and implementing new technologies and procedures.
NextGen is not a single piece of equipment or a program or a system
that will instantaneously transform the air transportation system.
NextGen is an evolutionary process, and existing systems must be
sustained as we transition. NextGen builds on legacy systems to
increase capability in today's National Airspace System (NAS), adds new
performance-based procedures and routes, and ultimately delivers
programs that transform the NAS. NextGen takes advantage of new
technology that is similarly being used to transform our personal lives
and the way we do business, such as GPS, analog-to-digital, and network
to network data sharing.
NextGen goals will be realized through the development of aviation-
specific applications for existing, widely-used technologies. They will
also be realized through the fostering of technological innovation in
areas such as weather forecasting, data networking, and digital
communications. Hand in hand with state-of-the-art technology will be
new airport infrastructure and new procedures, including the shift of
certain decision-making tools and accompanying responsibility from the
ground to the cockpit.
As it is implemented, NextGen will gradually allow aircraft to
safely fly more closely together on more direct routes, reducing
delays, and providing benefits for the environment and the economy
through reductions in carbon emissions, fuel consumption, and noise.
Defining NextGen: The Need
Although it is extremely safe, and staffed by a capable, dedicated
work force, our current air traffic control system is not scalable or
flexible enough to keep up with future demand. Our future preeminence
as a nation in air transportation is not assured. In addition to
improving efficiency and creating additional capacity, NextGen is
needed to provide corresponding enhancements to safety and
environmental performance. It will bring to air transportation the same
twenty-first century processes that give operations in other industries
greater reliability, flexibility, and predictability.
Even in the face of falling demand and reduced capacity, we've seen
congestion continue in our busiest airspace and airports. In February
2008, there were 1,171,721 operations, while in February 2009, there
were 1,040,150 operations. That's a reduction of over 11 percent.
Still, while traffic is down overall, our congested airspace in New
York/New Jersey/Philadelphia has seen only about a 5.5 percent
reduction in traffic from last year to this year.
We know that we must be poised to handle future demand that will
surely return as the Nation's economy improves. In fact, the aviation
sector will be an important factor in the Nation's economic recovery.
The FAA estimates that in 2006, civil aviation accounted for 11 million
jobs and represented 5.6 percent of the Gross Domestic Product; and,
according to the FAA's calculations using U.S. International Trade
Commission's reported trade data statistics, at $61 billion, aerospace
products and parts contributed more to the positive balance of trade
than any other sector--$32 billion more than the next highest
contributor.
NextGen must also help manage the constraints on the air
transportation system from the environmental impacts of aircraft noise
and emissions and concerns about energy usage. Increased efficiency
with NextGen operations will lead to reduced fuel consumption resulting
in lower carbon emissions. NextGen investments in engine and airframe
design and alternative fuels will produce the changes needed to reduce
the environmental impact of aviation.
NextGen will also increase the safety of an already exceedingly
safe system. NextGen further enables FAA's transition from traditional
forensic investigations of accidents and incidents to a prognostic
approach to improving safety. NextGen promotes the open exchange of
pertinent safety information to continuously improve aviation safety.
Benefits of NextGen
NextGen is reaping the benefits originated under the Operational
Evolution Plan (OEP). Communities, airports, and the FAA continue to
work together to build new runways, which provide significant capacity
and operational improvements. In Fiscal Year 2009, four runway projects
have been commissioned. On November 20, three major new runways opened:
at Seattle-Tacoma, Washington Dulles, and Chicago O'Hare International
Airports. The Seattle runway is expected to cut local delays in half by
increasing capacity in bad weather by 60 percent, while the new runway
at Dulles will provide capacity for an additional 100,000 annual
operations. The new Chicago runway, which added capacity for an
additional 52,300 annual operations, is a part of the greater O'Hare
Modernization Program (OMP) that will reconfigure the airport's
intersecting runways into a more modern, parallel layout. The OMP will
substantially reduce delays in all weather conditions and increase
capacity at the airfield, allowing O'Hare to meet the region's aviation
needs well into the future. On February 12, a runway extension at
Philadelphia was completed, helping reduce delays at the airport.
Looking forward for the next 3 years, new runways will open at
Charlotte and Chicago O'Hare. Eleven other runway projects are in the
planning or environmental stage at OEP airports through 2018.
While airfield improvements offer significant capacity increases,
they alone are not enough to address current problems at certain
airports, or the growth in demand we expect in the future. New
technology and procedures can help us gain extra use from existing
runways.
Today, capacity for closely spaced parallel runway operations
(CSPO) is dramatically reduced in poor visibility conditions. We are
working on capabilities that allow for continued use of those runways
in low visibility conditions by providing precise path assignments that
provide safe separation between aircraft assigned on parallel paths,
restoring capacity and reducing delays throughout the system. In
November 2008, we published a national order that allows us to safely
reduce separation between aircraft approaching parallel runways at
Boston, Cleveland, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Seattle. In good
visibility Seattle's pair of parallel runways, together, could handle
roughly 60 operations per hour; poor visibility conditions cut that
rate in half. Even in poor visibility, the new order now safely allows
a rate of about 52 operations per hour, a significant improvement for
the airport and its users. We are beginning to see similar benefits in
Boston.
This order is a first step in a phased approach for safely
increasing the use of CSPOs through a combination of procedural changes
and new ground and aircraft equipment. Down the road, new rules for
CSPOs could give airports more design flexibility so that they can
safely build runways more closely together, increasing their capacity
within their existing boundaries, providing better service to their
communities without requiring additional land.
Performance-based navigation is another building block for NextGen
which we are accelerating with cooperation from industry. Performance-
based routes and procedures result in shorter distances flown, which
add up to both fuel and time savings. Fuel savings equate to reduced
emissions, enhancing environmental performance. Safety is increased as
air traffic operations become more predictable. Performance-based
navigation includes Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation
Procedures (RNP), which allow equipped aircraft to fly more direct and
precise paths, reducing flight time and fuel use, as well as localizer
performance with vertical guidance (LPV) procedures, which can increase
access to airports, especially in low visibility conditions.
Advances in performance-based procedures and routes allow for
optimal use of airspace. The FAA maximizes the use of airspace,
especially in congested areas, through targeted airspace and procedures
enhancements. Continuing work in the New York area includes integration
of RNAV procedures, relocation and expansion of airways, airspace
reconfiguration, and creation of optimal descent procedures. In the
Chicago area, the FAA is adding departure routes and changing
procedures to allow for triple arrivals. In southern Nevada, the FAA is
optimizing existing airports and airspace. Houston will also see
additional departure routes and arrival procedures, along with improved
procedures to avoid severe weather.
Operators like Southwest Airlines recognize the value of
performance-based navigation. The airline made the business decision
early last year to equip its entire fleet for RNAV and RNP procedures.
The company envisions building a network of RNP routes for their
system. Southwest believes its $175 million investment can be recouped
within the next three to 5 years because of the operational
efficiencies RNP offers. We are currently working with Southwest on a
pilot project to build RNAV/RNP routes between Texas' Dallas Love Field
and Houston Hobby airports.
Today, more than three-quarters of commercial aircraft are equipped
for RNAV, and almost half of these are equipped for RNP precision
procedures. Likewise, more than 20,000 aircraft are equipped for LPVs.
This level of equipage provides an excellent opportunity for the
aviation community to use what it already has to produce ever-greater
benefits. FAA has responded: last year the agency published more than
600 performance-based navigation procedures and routes, versus our goal
of almost 400. The FAA plans to keep up this pace each year for the
next 4 years.
Because the realization of NextGen benefits is integrally linked to
how quickly the operators equip their aircraft, it is imperative that
the FAA work closely with industry on NextGen deployment. As such, the
FAA has established a NextGen Implementation Task Force with RTCA, an
industry association that serves as a Federal advisory committee. The
task force will provide recommendations on how to move forward together
on implementation. FAA's governing principles for accelerating
equipage, published in the January 2009 FAA's NextGen Implementation
Plan, provide a starting point for this work. These principles focus on
mitigating the risk for early adopters of NextGen avionics, while
providing the maximum operational benefits in the airspace where
they're most needed. They also focus on international interoperability,
and incentivizing the equipage of aircraft that meet evolving
environmental standards. The Task Force will deliver recommendations to
the FAA in August 2009.
Our current national airspace system is safer than it has ever
been. However, new means are required to ensure this remains the case
as we transform the NAS. NextGen will continue that trend in the face
of increasing traffic and the introduction of very light jets, unmanned
aerial vehicles, and commercial space flights. To continue to minimize
risk as we introduce a wave of new systems and procedures over the next
decade, the aviation community will continue its move to safety
management systems and other aspects of proactive management, where
trends are analyzed to uncover problems early on. This allows
preventive measures to be put in place before any accidents can occur.
An important part of NAS modernization, the FAA's Aviation Safety
and Information Analysis and Sharing program (ASIAS), provides a suite
of tools that extract relevant knowledge from large amounts of
disparate safety information. The FAA is partnering with NASA and major
airlines for ASIAS, which helps FAA and our industry partners to
monitor the effectiveness of safety enhancements. In use today, ASIAS
will ensure that the operational capabilities that produce capacity,
efficiency and environmental benefits are first and foremost inherently
safe. ASIAS has already demonstrated the ability to measure the
performance of safety solutions to known problems, such as Loss of
Control, Controlled Flight Into Terrain, Runway Incursion, Approach,
and Landing Accident Reduction. Additionally, ASIAS has demonstrated
the ability to detect new safety issues, such as terrain avoidance
warning system alerts (TAWS) at mountainous terrain airports, and to
identify solutions that have the potential to virtually eliminate these
threats. Between now and Fiscal Year 2013, the FAA intends to increase
the number of data bases ASIAS can access; expand ASIAS to include
maintenance/air traffic information; increase membership by adding
regional air carriers; increase community stakeholders to include
general aviation, helicopter and military; and increase the automated
search capabilities.
The primary environmental and energy issues that will significantly
influence the future capacity and flexibility of the NAS are aircraft
noise, air quality, global climate effects, energy availability, and
water quality. Aviation accounts for approximately 3 percent of direct
greenhouse gas emissions, and national and international concerns about
climate impacts could constrain the industry in the future, if not
properly addressed. An environmental management system approach will be
used to integrate all environmental and energy considerations into core
NextGen business and operational strategies.
In 2009, we are moving forward on a research consortium called
Continuous Low Emissions, Energy and Noise (CLEEN), which will allow us
to work with industry to accelerate the maturation of technology that
will lower energy, emissions and noise. CLEEN also seeks to advance
renewable alternative fuels for aviation. These fuels not only improve
air quality and reduce life cycle greenhouse emissions, but also
enhance energy security and supplies. FAA helped form--and is an active
participant in--the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative,
or CAAFI. Alternative fuels will be the ``game changer'' technology
that gets us closer to carbon neutrality. Significant deliverables in
the FY09-13 period include demonstrations of clean and quiet aircraft
technologies that can be transitioned into new products and used to
retrofit existing products, approval of generic renewable fuels for
aviation, and models and guidance to improve our ability to quantify
environmental costs and benefits and to optimize solutions, including
those to address CO2 and non-CO2 aviation climate
impacts.
Current Status
FAA is working closely with all aspects of the aviation community
to make NextGen a reality sooner rather than later. We are also
leveraging the capabilities of our legacy systems to improve
operations. We're partnering with several of the Nation's air carriers
for trials and demonstrations; we're engaging with universities like
Embry Riddle. We're working with pilots, dispatchers, and controllers
on NextGen integration and development to achieve balance in the safety
and efficiency design of NextGen. The FAA has established an integrated
demonstration capability in Florida where, working with a wide range of
government, university and industry partners, we are evaluating NextGen
technologies. We're working with airport authorities, manufacturers and
with government bodies and industry from around the world. We are
collaborating with Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) Working
Groups, RTCA, and other industry groups to integrate stakeholder
requirements into government commitments.
Moreover, this past year, through the efforts of the JPDO, we have
seen the contributions to NextGen resulting from cross-department and
cross-agency cooperation increase significantly. Through the cross-
agency support provided by the JPDO and its Senior Policy Committee, we
are collaborating with the Department of Transportation (DOT), the
Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Commerce (Commerce), the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA). Some of our collaborations have resulted
in:
DOD established a division at JPDO to work on efficient and
secure information sharing;
The Departments of Commerce, Defense and the FAA have
collaborated to deliver the first NextGen weather capability in
2013; and
JPDO conceived and facilitated the formation of Research
Transition Teams to further the effective transition of
research from NASA to implementation in the FAA.
The FAA officially began its development of NextGen in Fiscal Year
2007 by identifying and funding two transformational programs--
Automatic Dependent Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B) and System Wide
Information Management (SWIM). ADS-B is a key component of NextGen that
will move air traffic control from a system based on radar to one that
uses satellite-derived aircraft location data. In addition to improved
safety with traffic, weather, and flight information, the system also
promises greater efficiency and flexibility for the national airspace
system. Aircraft transponders receive GPS signals and use them to
determine the aircraft's precise position in the sky, which is combined
with other data and broadcast out to other aircraft and air traffic
controllers.
ADS-B is surveillance, like radar, but offers more precision and
additional services, such as weather and traffic information. ADS-B
provides air traffic controllers and pilots with much more accurate
information to help keep aircraft safely separated in the sky and on
runways. When properly equipped with ADS-B, both pilots and controllers
will, for the very first time, see the same real-time displays of air
traffic, thereby substantially improving safety.
NextGen transformational programs made significant advances over
the past year. ADS-B essential services have been deployed in southern
Florida and are being deployed in the Gulf of Mexico, where we have
never had radar coverage. In December, FAA achieved its In-Service
Decision for ADS-B essential services in southern Florida. Achievement
of this major milestone clears the way for national deployment of
broadcast services. The National Aeronautics Association recognized
ADS-B last year by presenting the ADS-B team with its Collier Trophy.
This award is given yearly for ``the greatest achievement in
aeronautics or astronautics in America with respect to improving the
performance, efficiency and safety of air or space vehicles.'' The
Collier award is generally recognized as the epitome of aviation
innovation and excellence.
The SWIM program, Data Communications, and NAS Voice Switch
achieved major acquisition milestones, and NextGen Network Enabled
Weather (NNEW) conducted demonstrations of the integration of weather
data into automated decision support tools. This is a necessary step in
the realization of improved management of weather in the NAS.
An updated FAA NextGen Implementation Plan was published in January
2009. This edition of the plan focuses on answering five fundamental
questions: What does NextGen look like in 2018; what aircraft avionics
are needed to support operations in 2018; what benefits will be
delivered by 2018; what is the FAA specifically committed to deploy in
the near-term that makes the most of existing resources; and what
activities are underway to support future capabilities?
While the focus of the FAA's NextGen Implementation Plan is on the
mid-term (through 2018), the plan, coupled with the NAS Enterprise
Architecture, provides a picture of near-term (2009-2013) deliverables.
FAA's near-term NextGen implementation efforts are targeted across
three broad areas: airfield development, air traffic operations, and
aircraft capabilities. Together, these efforts will increase capacity
and operational efficiency, enhance safety, and improve our
environmental performance. We are moving forward with a dual-pronged
approach: maximizing the use of untapped capabilities in today's
aircraft and ground infrastructure, while working aggressively to
develop and deploy new systems and procedures that will form a
foundation for more transformative capabilities that will be delivered
in the mid-term. We believe this approach allows both government and
industry to extract the greatest value from existing investments, while
positioning the industry to gain exponential benefits in the mid-term
and beyond.
From that first investment of $109 million in 2007, and supported
by sound evaluation and planning, FAA funding for NextGen grew to $202
million in Fiscal Year 2008 and $688 million is anticipated this Fiscal
Year. The Administration's Fiscal Year 2010 budget includes
approximately $800 million for NextGen. The January 2009 NAS Enterprise
Architecture and NextGen Implementation Plan support these funding
numbers.
Along those lines, I would like to thank this Committee and the
Congress for the additional $200 million in economic recovery funding
that will be used for repairing and upgrading our air traffic
facilities and equipment. This will go a long way to improving our
buildings and providing our workforce with the tools they need to do
their jobs well.
We do have other interim efforts to enhance safety and operations,
such as Runway Status Lights (RWSL). The RWSL system integrates airport
lighting equipment with approach and surface surveillance systems to
provide a visual signal to pilots and vehicle operators indicating that
it is unsafe to enter/cross or begin takeoff on a runway. The system is
fully automated based on inputs from surface and terminal surveillance
systems. Airport surveillance sensor inputs are processed through
safety logic that commands in-pavement lights to illuminate red when
there is traffic on or approaching the runway.
The RWSLs will activate either when it is unsafe to enter a runway
from a taxiway (referred to as runway entrance lighting or RELs) or
when it is unsafe to take off from a runway (called takeoff hold
lighting or THLs). For example, if an aircraft is landing or departing,
the RELs will illuminate indicating it is unsafe for an aircraft or
vehicle to go onto that runway from a taxiway. Another example is if an
aircraft starts to cross a runway when there is an aircraft ready for
departure on that runway, the THLs will illuminate indicating to the
pilot that it is unsafe to continue the departure. Both RELs and THLs
will automatically turn off when the system determines it to be safe.
RWSLs are red lights only; there are no green lights in RWSLs.
We currently have RWSL systems installed, one at San Diego
International Airport, and the other at Dallas/Ft. Worth International
Airport. Installation of RWSL systems is underway at Los Angeles
International Airport and at Boston Logan International Airport. The
FAA is scheduled to install RWSL systems at 18 other airports by 2011.
In addition, we are continuing to test additional runway lights: in
Boston we are testing Runway Intersection Lighting (RIL) to guard
runway intersections; and at Dallas/Ft. Worth, we are testing the
enhanced Final Approach Runway Occupancy Signal (eFAROS) to alert
landing traffic that a runway is occupied.
Labor Issues
I know that this Committee has always been interested in how FAA
has interacted with our labor unions, and I would like to address that
briefly. In his confirmation hearing before this Committee, Secretary
LaHood made it very clear that resolving labor disputes was one of his
top priorities for the FAA, and that he was seeking to fill the FAA
Administrator position with someone who had the people skills to
resolve our outstanding issues with the National Air Traffic
Controllers Association (NATCA). As someone who has sat on both sides
of the labor debate, I fully support the Secretary's priority on this.
Our controllers, indeed, our entire work force, are our most
valuable assets in ensuring the safety of the traveling public. As
such, we have included controllers in all phases of NextGen so far.
Controller input has come from individual controllers who have been
invited to participate in NextGen development, though they were not
participating as official NATCA representatives. NATCA does have a seat
on the NextGen Management Board, the governance structure that we
originally put in place as our framework for achieving NextGen. I look
forward to moving ahead toward a resolution of our differences. These
have been challenging times for us, and I want to commend all the hard
work that has occurred on both sides.
Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee, this
concludes my prepared remarks. Thank you again for inviting me here
today to discuss FAA's air traffic modernization program. I would be
happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Krakowski, thank you very much.
Next, we'll hear from Dr. Gerald Dillingham, who's the
Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues at the GAO.
Dr. Dillingham?
STATEMENT OF GERALD L. DILLINGHAM, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Dr. Dillingham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
DeMint, Chairman Rockefeller, members of the Subcommittee.
Since the FAA first announced the air traffic control
modernization program in 1981, the Nation has spent over $50
billion on ATC improvements. However, today's ATC system cannot
meet tomorrow's forecasted demands, and is straining to meet
today's demands.
Seven years ago, the Commission on the Future of the U.S.
Aerospace Industry recommended the establishment of a joint
program office to plan for meeting the Nation's air
transportation needs in the 21st century. The FAA has developed
a vision for NextGen, which it plans to fully implement by
2025, and has completed much of the planning for it.
Support for this vision is widespread, but some of the
aviation community maintains that the plans are not
sufficiently detailed, especially for airlines, manufacturers,
and other system users. Stakeholders have also expressed
concerns about the governance and management plan for
implementing NextGen. Some major stakeholders are still saying
they are not sure what is and what is not included in NextGen.
During the last 2 years, we identified a shift in
stakeholder emphasis. Instead of focusing on 2025 and a full
and complete system transformation, stakeholders are asking for
specifics about what can be done immediately to address current
system delays and congestion.
In 2008, almost one in four flights arrived late or was
canceled, and the average flight delay increased, despite a 6
percent decline in the total number of operations. We have
previously reported to this committee on the stakeholders'
interest in what some refer to as NowGen. NowGen focuses on
obtaining the maximum benefits available from existing and
proven capabilities and existing NAS infrastructure as a bridge
to NextGen.
The FAA is to be commended for its recent actions to
address today's problems, including its issuance, in January
2009, of a NextGen implementation plan that focuses on
improving the efficiency and capacity of the NAS between now
and 2018.
Another recent action is the FAA's establishment of the
RTCA Task Force, which is charged with identifying capabilities
that can be implemented in the next few years, and prioritizing
them according to their relative merits and net benefits. To
obtain the full benefits of the new capabilities, the private
sector will have to invest in them as well as the government,
but before the private sector stakeholders, especially
airlines, will invest, they will need to be convinced that
their investments will produce a relatively quick return in the
form of enhanced operational capabilities, fuel savings, or
environmental benefits.
Given the financial health of the industry and of the
economy, the FAA may have to create some incentives for
airlines to make early investments in new technologies and
capabilities.
The FAA also faces key challenges in the mid-term and
longer term. These challenges include, first, developing
standards and procedures and regulations that will further
enable the use of existing capabilities; second, maintaining
and repairing existing facilities so that they can continue to
be used safely and reliably as part of the current system and,
in some cases, integrated into NextGen; third, addressing the
FAA's human resource needs so that adequate numbers of staff
with the right skill mix are available to implement the
transition; and finally, supporting research and development,
especially with regard to weather, human factors, and
environmental issues.
Work on longer-term challenges, such as infrastructure
development, will also need to begin as soon as possible to
ensure that solutions are available when needed. For example,
the FAA has already identified 14 major airports that will need
additional runways by 2025 to meet the forecasted demands.
According to a JPDO analysis, when the proposed NextGen
technology solutions are added to the planned increase in
runways, the best-case scenario shows an average increased
system capacity of only about 60 percent.
Mr. Chairman, without the necessary follow-through on
transforming the national airspace system and meeting the near-
and longer-term challenges, the predictions of system gridlock
could come true, resulting in severe effects for the traveling
public, the national economy, and the U.S.'s global
competitiveness.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral statement.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Dillingham follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D. Director,
Physical Infrastructure Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you this morning on
efforts to transform the Nation's current air traffic control (ATC)
system to the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen).
Currently, the U.S. air transportation system handles about 50,000
flights over a 24-hour period. By 2025, air traffic is projected to
increase to about 80,000 flights every 24 hours. Today's U.S. air
transportation system will not be able to meet these air traffic
demands. In fact, as we all know, today's system is straining to meet
current demands. For example, in 2008, almost one in four flights
either arrived late or was canceled, and the average flight delay
increased despite a 6 percent decline in the total number of
operations. The transformation to NextGen, together with other ongoing
ATC modernization efforts, promises to enhance the capacity and
efficiency of our air transportation system while maintaining safety
and minimizing the environmental impact of air transportation.
In Vision 100,\1\ enacted in 2003, Congress directed the Secretary
of Transportation to establish the Joint Planning and Development
Office (JPDO) to plan and coordinate the transition to NextGen in
collaboration with other Federal agencies \2\ and the aviation
industry. NextGen will transform the current radar-based ATC system
into a more automated, aircraft-centered, satellite-based system, and
will shift the operating paradigm from air traffic control to air
traffic management. NextGen encompasses five major transformational
programs--Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B), System-
Wide Information Management (SWIM), NextGen Data Communications
(DataComm), NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW), and National
Airspace Voice Switch (NVS).\3\ JPDO--located organizationally within
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)--is responsible for NextGen
planning and coordination. FAA's Air Traffic Organization (ATO), headed
by its Chief Operating Officer (COO), is responsible for implementing
the transition to NextGen. At the same time, FAA is planning and
implementing other capabilities that have not been designated
specifically as NextGen efforts but are also expected to enhance the
capacity and efficiency of the air transportation system. FAA plans to
implement these capabilities in the midterm, defined as 2012 through
2018, and eventually to integrate them with NextGen transformational
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, Pub. L.
No. 108-176, 117 Stat. 2490 (2003).
\2\ NextGen was designed as an interagency effort in order to
leverage various agencies' expertise and funding to advance NextGen
while avoiding duplication. The Federal partner agencies are the
Departments of Commerce (particularly its National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration), Defense, Homeland Security, and
Transportation; the Federal Aviation Administration; the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration; and the White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy.
\3\ ADS-B is a satellite navigation system that is designed, along
with other navigation technologies, to enable more precise control of
aircraft during en route flight, approach, and descent. SWIM is an
information management architecture for the national airspace system,
acting as its ``World Wide Web.'' SWIM will manage surveillance,
weather, and flight data, as well as aeronautical and system status
information, and will provide the information securely to users.
DataComm provides a digital communications link for two-way exchanges
between controllers and flight crews for ATC clearances, instructions,
advisories, flight crew requests, and reports. NNEW will serve as the
core of the NextGen weather support services and provide a common
weather picture across the national airspace system. NVS will replace
existing switches and provide the foundation for all air/ground and
ground/ground voice communications in the future ATC environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My testimony this morning addresses: (1) JPDO's and ATO's progress
in planning NextGen and changes in the NextGen management structure;
(2) ongoing efforts to implement midterm capabilities to address
capacity constraints and delays, and issues related to these efforts;
and (3) key human capital issues, research and development needs, and
facilities maintenance and reconfiguration challenges going forward. My
statement is based on recent related GAO reports and testimonies,
updated with more recent FAA data, and our discussions with selected
senior FAA officials; officials of the National Air Traffic Controller
Association (NATCA) and the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists
(PASS) unions; and aviation industry stakeholders, including the Air
Transport Association, which represents U.S. airlines, and aircraft and
avionics industry representatives. This work was conducted in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the work 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.
JPDO and ATO Have Issued Key NextGen Plans, but ATO Restructuring and
Recent Executive Order Have Not Fully Resolved NextGen
Management Issues
JPDO and ATO have issued key NextGen plans and have reorganized the
management structure for NextGen. We have previously reported on
stakeholders' concerns about the fragmented management structure for
NextGen and resulting lack of clear accountability for NextGen's
implementation. While recent FAA efforts have made progress on this
front, they have yet to fully resolve stakeholders' concerns. Resolving
this issue will be critical to advancing both the implementation of
capabilities in the midterm and the full transformation to NextGen in
the long term.
Planning Effort Has Shifted to Focus on Implementation, but Continues
to Lack Specific Timelines and Commitments
Since 2003, JPDO and ATO have made progress in planning for and
implementing NextGen. In accordance with Vision 100, JPDO created a
multi-agency research and development plan for the transition to
NextGen. This plan consists of three basic documents--a Concept of
Operations, an Enterprise Architecture, and an Integrated Work Plan.\4\
Collectively, these three documents form a basis for interagency and
industry planning and coordination. JPDO views these plans as iterative
and intends to issue further versions as NextGen technologies are
developed and implemented. As NextGen progressed from the planning to
the implementation phase, ATO produced its NextGen Implementation Plan,
which addresses the more detailed level of planning and activities
necessary to achieve NextGen capabilities. According to ATO, it and
JPDO have worked to align and ensure linkages between these planning
documents. The current version of the NextGen Implementation Plan,
released in January 2009, focuses on the midterm (2012 though 2018)
implementation of NextGen capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Concept of Operations describes how the NextGen system is
envisioned to operate in 2025 and beyond and identifies key research
and policy issues. The Enterprise Architecture is a technical
description of the NextGen system, akin to blueprints for a building;
it is meant to provide a common tool for planning and understanding the
complex, interrelated systems that will make up NextGen. JPDO's
Integrated Work Plan is akin to a project plan and is meant to describe
the capabilities needed to transition to NextGen from the current
system and provide the research, policy, regulation, and acquisition
timelines necessary to achieve NextGen by 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a previous testimony,\5\ we raised some concerns about the
usefulness of the NextGen planning documents, and we still have some
concerns. For example, we reported that the planning documents lacked
the type of specific information that industry stakeholders need for
their own planning purposes, such as a catalog of critical needs,
clearly defined and prioritized intermediate objectives, and a
structured plan for achieving tangible results. Recent versions of
NextGen planning documents have partially addressed some of these
concerns, but industry stakeholders continue to express frustration
that the planning documents lack any specific timelines or commitments.
A senior FAA official has acknowledged that FAA will face ongoing
challenges in attempting to communicate effectively with industry and
other stakeholders to ensure that they fully understand the content and
objectives of the initiative and remain engaged and committed to its
planning and implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ GAO, Next Generation Air Transportation System: Status of Key
Issues Associated with the Transition to NextGen, GAO-08-1154T
(Washington, D.C. Sept. 11, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NextGen Organizational Structure Has Undergone Changes, but Roles and
Responsibilities Continue to Be Unclear
Initially, JPDO was established as a separate and independent
office within FAA reporting directly to both the COO of ATO and the FAA
Administrator (see fig. 1).
Figure 1: FAA Organization, November 2007
Source: FAA.
In May 2008, FAA announced a reorganization of its NextGen
management structure and named a Senior Vice President for NextGen and
Operations Planning who reports to ATO's COO (see fig. 2.). The
reorganization eliminated JPDO's dual reporting status, and the JPDO
Director now reports directly to the newly created Senior Vice
President for NextGen and Operations Planning. The reorganization also
led to JPDO's placement lower in FAA's organizational structure--it is
now a fourth-level organization.
Figure 2: Current FAA and ATO Organization
Source: FAA.
According to ATO's COO, a purpose of the reorganization was to
respond to industry stakeholders' concerns about the fragmentation of
authority and lack of accountability for NextGen, which might delay its
implementation. In particular, stakeholders have expressed frustration
that a program as large and important as NextGen does not follow the
industry practice of having one person with the authority to make key
decisions. In the COO's view, the reorganization creates one ``team''
with one person in charge to plan, implement, and oversee NextGen.
According to FAA, the Senior Vice President for NextGen and Operations
Planning is responsible for integrating and implementing all elements
of NextGen. However, this individual does not have budget authority
over several key NextGen projects, according to a recent testimony from
the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Inspector General.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Federal Aviation Administration: Actions Needed to Achieve Mid-
Term NextGen Goals. Statement by Calvin L. Scovel III, Inspector
General, U.S. Department of Transportation before the Subcommittee on
Aviation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, U.S. Congress (Washington D.C., March 18, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In November 2008, the President issued Executive Order 13479,\7\
which took the positive step of treating NextGen as an important
national initiative, but potentially added another level of complexity
and uncertainty to the management structure for NextGen. The order
directed the Secretary to create a staff to support the Senior Policy
Committee, an advisory body chaired by the Secretary of Transportation
whose members are the heads of the Federal partner agencies and whose
purpose is to provide policy guidance for NextGen planning. Previously,
JPDO coordinated the agenda of the Senior Policy Committee, but now,
according to FAA, the new support staff will coordinate the committee's
agenda, although JPDO will continue to be involved in the development
of issues and topics for the committee. Furthermore, notwithstanding
JPDO's statutory responsibility for coordinating with the Federal
partner agencies, the director of the support staff will serve as the
senior DOT liaison between the Secretary and the Federal partner
agencies. It remains unclear how these changes will affect JPDO's role
relative to the Senior Policy Committee or to other Federal partner
agencies. The executive order also directed the Secretary to establish
a committee to advise the Secretary on the implementation of NextGen.
According to FAA's interpretation of the executive order, the new
advisory committee will be an external (nongovernmental) committee
whose role will be to provide an external stakeholder perspective. The
role of this committee could potentially duplicate the roles of other
advisory bodies associated with the NextGen initiative. FAA has said
that it and JPDO are working with DOT to clarify roles and
responsibilities in executing the executive order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Transformation of the National Air Transportation System, Exec.
Order No. 13479 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is difficult to tell how well the reorganization and the
implementation of the executive order will address stakeholders'
concerns about the fragmentation of authority for NextGen. For example,
although the reorganization places JPDO and the office responsible for
NextGen integration and implementation under the leadership of the same
Senior Vice President, other activities critical to NextGen's
implementation lie outside this official's jurisdiction. Several types
of aviation operations are under the leadership of the Senior Vice
President for Operations, and responsibilities for airport and aviation
safety activities fall outside ATO altogether and are headed by FAA
Associate Administrators. According to FAA, the NextGen Management
Board, which is composed of Associate Administrators, the COO, Senior
Vice Presidents, and the Director of the JPDO, ensures agency-wide
support for NextGen. However with no direct line of authority between
the Senior Vice President for NextGen and Operations Planning and these
other operations and activities, accountability for NextGen outcomes is
unclear, creating the potential for delays in implementation. It is
also unclear how the reorganization and the implementation of the
executive order will affect the overall role created for JPDO by Vision
100. For example, according to one industry stakeholder, their ability
to understand and be involved in the NextGenrelated efforts of Federal
partner agencies has been hampered by JPDO's placement under ATO's
management.
Several stakeholders have suggested that an office above the Senior
Vice President for NextGen and Operations Planning and these other
units--an office that would report directly to the FAA Administrator or
the Secretary of Transportation--is needed to ensure accountability for
NextGen results. In contrast, another stakeholder suggested that
further reorganization may not be needed, but FAA's existing leadership
could play a greater role in clarifying the responsibilities of the
various offices involved in planning and implementing NextGen and in
clearly assigning accountability for NextGen outcomes.
Industry Stakeholders Seek More Rapid Midterm Implementation of
Existing Capabilities, but Progress Depends Both on Airlines'
Investments and on FAA's Validation, Certification, and
Rulemaking
To help address current congestion and delays, many stakeholders
have suggested that FAA focus on maximizing what can be done with
existing, proven capabilities and existing infrastructure. We have
previously characterized this approach as ``NowGen.'' For example,
industry stakeholders highlighted ``off-the-shelf'' technologies,
including Traffic Management Advisor (TMA), Traffic Flow Management
(TFM), and User Request Evaluation Tool (URET), as well as performance-
based navigation \8\ and tailored arrival procedures. Such technologies
and procedures are being implemented in airports now and, according to
these stakeholders, could be implemented more widely and used more
effectively to address capacity constraints. For example, TMA--a
decision- support tool that helps controllers manage air traffic flows
more efficiently--has been used at some airports to increase capacity.
However, according to one stakeholder, some airports equipped with TMA
are not using it to its fullest extent to increase capacity. Industry
stakeholders also maintain that using existing performance-based
navigation procedures during low-visibility conditions--when the
required distances separating aircraft are normally increased for
safety reasons--would enable greater use of closely spaced parallel
runways, thereby increasing capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Performance-based navigation, which includes Area Navigation
(RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP), is a framework for
defining navigation performance requirements (``navigation
specifications'') that can be applied to an air traffic route, an
instrument procedure, or a defined airspace. Performance-based
navigation provides a basis for the design and implementation of
automated flight paths.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In part to help accelerate the implementation of existing
capabilities in the midterm--including technologies that are part of
NextGen's five transformational programs, such as ADS-B--FAA has
created a NextGen Midterm Implementation Task Force through RTCA.\9\
According to the NextGen Implementation Plan, the task force will focus
on maximizing the benefits of midterm NextGen operational capabilities
and addressing business and investment-related issues associated with
implementing these capabilities. A member of the task force indicated
that it will be identifying a handful of capabilities that can be
implemented in the midterm and prioritizing them according to their
relative net benefits. Furthermore, the task force will be examining
the potential for deploying capabilities regionally to address key
bottlenecks in the national air transportation system before deploying
them nationally. Current plans call for the task force to provide final
conclusions and recommendations to FAA in August 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ RTCA, Inc. is a private, not-for-profit corporation that
develops consensus-based recommendations on communications, navigation,
surveillance, and air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system issues. RTCA
functions as a Federal Advisory Committee. FAA uses its recommendations
as a basis for policy, program, and regulatory decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midterm Implementation Depends on Airlines' Acquisition of Required
Avionics
Implementing these capabilities in the midterm, as well as over the
long term, depends not only on FAA, but also on aircraft operators, who
must acquire the necessary equipment. For example, aircraft must be
equipped with appropriate technology to use ADS-B. Some airlines have
purchased some of the necessary technology, but over all, airlines are
waiting for FAA to specify requirements and address funding concerns.
In addition, industry stakeholders have expressed concerns about the
progress made by FAA in adequately explaining and demonstrating the
benefits of equipping aircraft with advanced avionics equipment, which
comes at a significant cost to the aviation industry. For example, one
industry stakeholder told us that, without an explicit FAA commitment
to reduce separation standards--a key benefit of deploying aircraft
with ADS-B equipment--the industry has little incentive to voluntarily
purchase the equipment. One objective of the new NextGen Midterm
Implementation Task Force is to help operators identify the benefits of
acquiring NextGencompatible equipment sooner rather than later.
A range of potential requirements and incentives could encourage
aircraft operators to purchase equipment. These could include mandated
deadlines or operational preferences--such as preferred airspace,
routings, or runway access. Industry stakeholders have expressed
concerns that the array of operational benefits available to early
equippers has yet to be identified and defined, and have also
questioned the extent to which such preferences would result in
tangible benefits. Another proposed option would combine mandated
deadlines and operational preferences with equipment investment tax
credits that would financially support equipment implementation for a
limited initial set of aircraft operators. The credits would provide a
competitive advantage for early equippers. Airlines that continue to
delay equipage will become more and more disadvantaged, thus providing
an incentive for these airlines to equip.
Midterm Implementation Also Depends on FAA's Validation, Certification,
and
Rulemaking Efforts
Before midterm NextGen implementation can occur, FAA must validate
and certify \10\ technologies and issue rules for the use of
procedures. FAA has made some progress in this area, including
developing specifications for performance-based navigation procedures
at selected airports, but much remains to be done. We and others have
previously expressed concerns about the time and human resources
required for these efforts and have identified them as a significant
risk to the timely and cost effective implementation of NextGen.\11\ In
recent interviews, stakeholders have expressed similar concerns about
the midterm implementation of existing or off-the-shelf technologies
and capabilities. For example, an avionics manufacturer, an aircraft
manufacturer, and an airline association we interviewed all cited the
time it takes to develop rules for new procedures and the problems that
result from deploying equipment before rules are finalized. Any
activities needed to implement new policies and procedures, such as the
expanded use of performance-based navigation procedures; to demonstrate
new capabilities, such as the use of closely spaced parallel runways;
to set parameters for the certification of new systems, such as ADS-B;
and to develop new technologies will take time and be a priority in the
mid- and long-term planning for NextGen. Just as important, the time
required to complete such activities will have to be balanced against
the need to ensure the reliability and safety of procedures and systems
before they are used in the national airspace system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Validation is the process through which a technology is shown
to operate in a real-life environment with a desired level of
confidence. Certification is a form of FAA approval for the use of a
technology, such as aircraft equipment, in the national airspace
system.
\11\ After studying the lead time required to prototype, validate,
and certify new technologies, we concluded that neither JPDO nor FAA
had sufficient resources to complete these types of tasks, and could
not develop them internally without causing significant delays to
NextGen-related capabilities. See GAO, Response to Questions for the
Record; Hearing on the Future of Air Traffic Control Modernization,
GAO-07-928R (Washington, D.C.: May 30, 2007). We discuss the human
capital element of this challenge in greater detail later in this
testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addressing Ongoing Human Capital, Research and Development, and
Facility and Capacity Challenges Will Be Critical for NextGen's
Implementation Going Forward
A number of other challenges affect FAA's ability to move forward
with NextGen's implementation. These challenges include resolving
ongoing human capital challenges, addressing research and development
needs, reconfiguring and maintaining existing facilities, and enhancing
the physical capacity of airports.
Resolving Key Human Capital Challenges, Including Involving Internal
Stakeholders and Acquiring Expertise, Will Be Critical to
NextGen's Success
Involving internal stakeholders, such as current air traffic
controllers and technicians, in planning for and deploying new
technologies will be important to NextGen's success. In our view, input
from current air traffic controllers with recent experience controlling
aircraft, who will be responsible for managing traffic in the NextGen
environment, and from current technicians, who will maintain NextGen
equipment, is important when considering human factors and safety
issues. Furthermore, our work on past ATC modernization projects has
shown that a lack of stakeholder or expert involvement early and
throughout a project can lead to cost increases and delays.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See GAO, Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Ensure Better
Coordination When Approving Air Traffic Control Systems, GAO-05-11
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 17, 2004) and GAO-08-1154T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have previously reported that active air traffic controllers
were not involved in the NextGen planning effort.\13\ In following up
on this issue, we found that some progress has been made. According to
FAA, it has used active controllers as subject matter experts in
NextGen development; representatives of both the controllers' and the
technicians' unions have seats on the NextGen Management Board; and the
controllers' union is participating in the NextGen Midterm
Implementation Task Force. Controller union officials have likewise
reported participating in several NextGen planning and decision-making
groups, including the Institute Management Council,\14\ and acknowledge
that active controllers serve as subject matter experts for NextGen
working groups. However, these union officials have expressed concern
that the union is not involved in selecting the subject matter experts.
According to the technicians' union, it does not generally participate
in NextGen efforts, although it has a liaison working on ADS-B and is
seeking to participate in the NextGen Midterm Implementation Task
Force.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See GAO-08-1154T.
\14\ The Institute Management Council, consisting of 16 senior
leaders from the aviation community, oversees the policy,
recommendations, and products of the NextGen Institute--which was
established by FAA and the National Center for Advanced Technologies to
provide JPDO with access to private-sector expertise, tools, and
facilities for application to NextGen activities and tasks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acquiring expertise in areas such as systems engineering and
contract management is another human capital challenge FAA faces going
forward. Because of the scope and complexity of the NextGen effort, the
agency may not currently have the in-house expertise to manage the
transition to NextGen without assistance. In November 2006, we
recommended that FAA examine the strengths and weaknesses of its
technical expertise and contract management expertise in light of the
skills required to define, implement, and integrate the numerous
complex programs inherent in the transition to NextGen.\15\ In response
to our prior recommendation, ATO contracted with the National Academy
of Public Administration (NAPA) to: (1) determine the mix of skills
needed by the nonoperational (acquisition) workforce to implement
NextGen and (2) identify the strategies for acquiring the necessary
workforce competencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ NextGeneration Air Transportation System: Progress and
Challenges Associated with the Transformation of the Next Generation
Air Transportation System, GAO-07-25 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 13, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In September 2008, NAPA completed its study and reported to FAA.
The study found that ATO will need to develop or strengthen skills in
the areas of software development, systems engineering, research and
development, strategic planning, financial budget analysis, and
contract administration, among others. However, the study identified
leadership as the single most important element of success for large-
scale systems integration efforts like NextGen and highlighted
leadership as a NextGen implementation challenge. The study, therefore,
recommended that FAA tailor its leadership development program to focus
on the specific leadership skills needed for managing this large,
complex, evolving program, to include communication, collaboration,
change management, and accountability and measurement. Strategies
presented to ATO for consideration in acquiring the skills needed for
the NextGen transition include aggressively marketing the NextGen
vision, enhancing internal research and development skills, and working
collaboratively with FAA headquarters to develop a more integrated
approach to NextGen workforce planning.
According to an FAA official, FAA plans to fill a total of 378
NextGen positions in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010. NextGen staffing needs
can be difficult to address, a senior FAA official said, because
historically NextGen skills have been in short supply and competitively
priced in the marketplace. However, the current economic conditions
could make hiring for these positions less difficult than it otherwise
might be. If not adequately addressed, this situation could contribute
to delays in integrating new technologies and transforming the national
airspace system.
Addressing Ongoing Research and Development Needs Is Key to Keeping the
Vision of NextGen on Track
As NextGen moves forward, applied research will be needed to
integrate its five transformational technologies, as well as the legacy
facilities and systems that will also be part of NextGen, to ensure
that all the components work safely and reliably together. According to
FAA, the funding requested in its Capital Improvement Program for 2009
through 2013 reflects the research and development and capital
investments deemed necessary to deliver NextGen capabilities in the
midterm. The funding requested for FAA NextGen research and development
has significantly increased, from a total of $83 million in Fiscal Year
2009 to about twice that amount in each of the next 4 Fiscal Years.\16\
FAA believes that this level of FAA funding for NextGen research and
development will complement investments made by Federal partner
agencies--particularly the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA)--and will adequately support NextGen's
implementation. In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
has increased NASA's budget for aeronautics research by $150 million,
although it does not indicate whether this additional funding will be
focused on NextGen-specific research.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ FAA has requested $161 million in Fiscal Year 2010, $164
million in Fiscal Year 2011, $165 million in Fiscal Year 2012, and $167
million in Fiscal Year 2013 for NextGen research. FAA has also
requested additional funding for other research
\17\ Pub. L. No. 111-5, title II, 123 Stat. 115 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA's aeronautics research has long supported FAA's air traffic
modernization efforts. To help ensure that NASA's aeronautics research
is effectively transferred to FAA, the two agencies have developed a
strategy that initially establishes four research transition teams,
which are aligned with JPDO's planning framework. This strategy also
outlines the two agencies' responsibilities for the research--FAA will
develop user requirements, and NASA will conduct the fundamental
research in each of the four areas and then transfer projects back to
FAA for further development. According to FAA, its collaboration with
NASA on the research transition teams has better focused NASA's
investments on FAA's requirements. Research transition teams have not,
however, been established between FAA and the other partner agencies.
Prioritizing the research and development needed for NextGen is
also important to avoid gaps and delays. The most recent version of
JPDO's Integrated Work Plan identifies the sequence of research that
must be completed before specific NextGen capabilities can completed.
This research, however, cannot be fully prioritized without identifying
the benefits that can be expected from the different capabilities and
technologies. According to JPDO officials, they are developing a matrix
that will identify benefits and costs and build a business case for all
the components of NextGen over the next year that will help in
prioritizing research and development.
Going forward, further research and development is needed in a
number of areas to implement NextGen, according to FAA, stakeholders,
and our analysis. For example:
Environmental Impact Research: According to a JPDO analysis,
the environmental impact of aviation will be the primary
constraint on the capacity and flexibility of the national
airspace system unless this impact is managed and mitigated. In
proposed legislation reauthorizing FAA, $111 million for Fiscal
Years 2009 through 2011 may be used for a new FAA research and
development program to help reduce aviation noise and
emissions. This program--the Continuous Lower Energy,
Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) initiative--would facilitate over
the next 10 years the development, maturation, and
certification of improved airframe technologies. Aeronautics
industry representatives and experts we consulted said that the
program's funding levels may not be sufficient to attain the
goals specified in the proposal. According to these experts,
the proposed funding levels would allow for the further
development of one or possibly two projects. FAA recognizes the
implications of the proposed funding structure for CLEEN and
characterizes the program as a ``pilot.''
Human Factors Research: Human factors research explores what
is known about people and their abilities, characteristics, and
limitations in the design of the equipment they use, the
environments in which they function, and the jobs they perform.
Compared with the current ATC system, NextGen will rely to a
greater extent on automation, and the roles and
responsibilities of pilots and air traffic controllers will
change. For example, both pilots and controllers will depend
more on automated communications and less on voice
communications. Such changes in roles and responsibilities
raise significant human factors issues for the safety and
efficiency of the national airspace system. Until Fiscal Year
2005, NASA was a primary source of Federal aviation-related
human factors research, but NASA then began reducing its human
factors research staff, reassigning some staff to other
programs and reducing the contractor and academic technical
support for human factors research. According to NASA, human
factors research continues to be a critical component of its
aeronautics research program, although its work is now focused
at the foundational (earlier-stage) level. FAA plans to invest
$180.4 million in human factors research from Fiscal Year 2009
through Fiscal Year 2013. It remains to be seen whether or to
what extent FAA's research and development, which is typically
more applied than NASA's, will offset NASA's reductions in
human factors research.
Weather Related Research: Improved weather information is
essential to realize key NextGen capabilities that depend on
accurate weather information for decision-making. According to
FAA, 70 percent of delays are attributable to weather every
year. NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW) is one of the five
NextGen transformational programs for which current research
and development efforts are needed, even though their full
benefits may not be realized until after the midterm. NNEW is
intended to provide weather support services for decision-
making in the NextGen environment. More specifically, NNEW is
FAA's contribution to the 4-dimensional weather cube \18\--a
technology that will provide weather observations and analyses,
including forecasts of expected weather conditions, for all
users of the national airspace system. FAA is developing the
requirements for this program, and the Department of Commerce,
through its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
will lead the development of the 4-dimensional weather cube,
using the Department of Commerce's resources and those of the
partner agencies. FAA expects to finish defining the
requirements for NNEW in March 2009. After validating the
requirements, FAA will solicit reviews from the relevant
stakeholders on the extent to which their requirements are
aligned with those of the other agencies. This is a
collaborative effort whose success will depend on contributions
from all parties. Delays in aligning agency requirements, as
well as the lack of meteorological knowledge, could lead to
delays in implementing NextGen systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The 4-dimensional weather cube describes the atmosphere in
three dimensions (latitude, longitude, and altitude) and adds the
dimension of time.
Beyond these research efforts, FAA has continued to move forward in
planning and conducting demonstrations of some key NextGen
technologies. For example, a recently announced demonstration with U.S.
Airways and Aviation Communications and Surveillance Systems at the
Philadelphia International Airport will test ADS-B technology that
allows an aircraft with the necessary avionics to transmit its own
position as well as to receive information from other similarly
equipped aircraft. FAA is providing $6 million to purchase the
necessary avionics equipment for the aircraft involved in the
demonstration. FAA has also initiated projects to demonstrate the
benefits of integrating NextGen capabilities. For example, in December
2008, FAA signed a memorandum of agreement with NetJets--an Ohio-based
air service provider with a fleet of 600 aircraft. In this
demonstration, FAA will test a number of NextGen technologies and
procedures including ADS-B. The company will provide real-time data,
allowing FAA to validate performance requirements. This demonstration
will help FAA identify the costs and benefits associated with NextGen
implementation.
Reconfiguring and Maintaining the Existing ATC System and Increasing
Physical Capacity Are Also Key Challenges
To fully realize NextGen's capabilities, a new configuration of ATC
facilities will be required. FAA has not developed a comprehensive
reconfiguration plan, but says that preliminary efforts are underway to
plan concepts for future FAA facilities. Going forward, it will also be
critical for FAA to ensure the safety and efficiency of its existing
ATC system, since it will be the core of the national airspace system
for a number of years and some of its components will become part of
NextGen. FAA faces an immediate task to maintain and repair existing
facilities so that the current ATC system continues to operate safely
and reliably. FAA has estimated a one-time cost of $268 million to
repair 400 existing terminal facilities. Once FAA develops and
implements a facility reconfiguration plan, the costs of facility
repairs and maintenance may be reduced. The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides $200 million to be made available
within the next 2 years for improvements in power systems, air route
traffic control centers, air traffic control towers, terminal radar
approach control facilities, and navigation and landing equipment and
indicates that projects that can be completed in 2 years should be
given priority.\19\ The availability of these funds increases the
importance of FAA's developing facility consolidation and
reconfiguration plans to ensure that the funds are spent efficiently
and effectively. FAA has acknowledged the need to keep long-term plans
in mind so that it does not invest unnecessarily in facilities that
will not be used for NextGen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Pub. L. No. 111-5, title XII, 123 Stat. 115, 205 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, FAA has determined that, even after planned improvements
have been completed at 35 of the busiest airports, 14 airports--
including some of the 35 busiest--will still need enhanced physical
capacity by 2025. Planning infrastructure projects to increase
capacity, such as building additional runways, can be a lengthy
process, and will require substantial advance planning and safety and
cost analyses. Furthermore, without substantial reductions in emissions
and noise around the Nation's airports and continuing efforts at all
levels of government, including increased research and development
activities, achieving the goal of safely expanding the capacity and
efficiency of the national airspace system to meet 21st century needs
may not be attainable.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to answer any questions
that you or Members of the Subcommittee may have at this time.
Appendix I: Related GAO Products
Next Generation Air Transportation System: Status of Transformation
and Issues Associated with Midterm Implementation of Capabilities. GAO-
09-479T. Washington, D.C. March 18, 2009.
Next Generation Air Transportation System: Status of Systems
Acquisition and the Transition to the Next Generation Air
Transportation System. GAO-08-1078. Washington, D.C.: September 11,
2008.
Responses to Questions for the Record; Hearing on the Future of Air
Traffic Control Modernization. GAO-07-928R. Washington, D.C.: May 30,
2007.
Next Generation Air Transportation System: Status of the Transition
to the Future Air Traffic Control System. GAO-07-784T. Washington,
D.C.: May 9, 2007.
Joint Planning and Development Office: Progress and Key Issues in
Planning the Transition to the Next Generation Air Transportation
System. GAO-07-693T. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2007.
Federal Aviation Administration: Key Issues in Ensuring the
Efficient Development and Safe Operation of the Next Generation Air
Transportation System. GAO-07-636T. Washington, D.C.: March 22, 2007.
Next Generation Air Transportation System: Progress and Challenges
Associated with the Transformation of the National Airspace System.
GAO-07-25. Washington, D.C.: November 13, 2006.
Senator Dorgan. Dr. Dillingham, thank you very much for
your statement.
Next, we will hear from Joe Kolshak, who is a Senior Vice
President of Operations at United Airlines.
Mr. Kolshak?
STATEMENT OF JOE KOLSHAK, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT--
OPERATIONS, UNITED AIRLINES ON BEHALF OF THE AIR TRANSPORT
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
Mr. Kolshak. Thank you, Senator Rockefeller, Chairman
Dorgan, and Members of the Subcommittee, for the opportunity to
talk about the urgent need to modernize our Nation's air
traffic control system.
I'll stress three key points about NextGen and air traffic
modernization. First, the time to act is now. NextGen is
NowGen. Next, with leadership and investment, key elements and
benefits of NextGen can be delivered in the next 3 to 5 years.
And finally, acceleration of NextGen will deliver real benefits
for our economy, our customers, and the environment.
In my career, running operations in the Marine Corps, at
United, and at other major airlines, and also as a pilot on the
Boeing 777 and other aircraft, I've witnessed developments that
have made commercial aircraft wonders of modern technology.
Unfortunately, I also see the steady decline in the performance
of the system that controls these modern aircraft. Our air
traffic control system is the safest in the world; however, in
terms of technology, it's outdated, it's limited, slow, and
often cumbersome.
These limitations impose significant cost on our society in
general, and the airline industry in particular. Air traffic
delays are costing the U.S. economy over $41 billion every
year. This includes lost passenger time, missed business
meetings, disrupted vacations, and so on. It also includes harm
to the broader economy, those who depend on predictable air
travel, such as the travel and tourism industry. And finally,
it also includes cost to the airlines.
At United alone, annual delay costs approach $600 million
annually. Without a modern, efficient, ATC system, U.S.
commerce is impaired and U.S. businesses will struggle to
compete effectively in the global economy.
Imagine, if you can, surface transportation without the
interstate highway system. It's where aviation finds itself
today.
In our challenging economic times, it's even more important
that we modernize the air traffic control system now. That's
why we call it NowGen instead of NextGen.
In my written testimony, I detail key technologies and
procedure changes that are available today and ready for
accelerated deployment. They all have complicated names, but
the services they deliver are actually quite simple.
They boil down to providing improved access to realtime
information, both for controllers and pilots, and this
information enables safer and more efficient spacing and
routing of planes in the air and while taxiing on the ground.
Unlike today's system that has its origin in the use of
bonfires to guide airplanes, the plans we advocate use modern
satellite technology to let pilots and controllers see the
whole picture in realtime. This allows them to communicate
better and to fly smarter.
It's not vastly different than the GPS systems available in
cars today, which give realtime traffic reports and allow you
to choose the best route to avoid congestion. And just like you
can get weather reports for any city in the world on your
iPhone or BlackBerry, these technologies better equip us to
deal with weather conditions, which contribute to over 70
percent of all air traffic delays.
We can achieve success in the near term, but the government
must accelerate its investment in NextGen elements that are
proven and ready to deploy today. This investment will
stimulate installation of facilities, avionics, and the
development of new procedures.
The benefits of accelerating modernization of our ATC
system are clear and compelling. That's why airlines, general
aviation, business aviation, and the military all agree on the
need to jumpstart NextGen.
By accelerating investment in our ATC infrastructure, it
will create and retain thousands of jobs in all sector of the
economy, and will improve the travel experience for customers
and communities across the system.
For example, when United experiences air traffic delays at
our hubs in Washington and Chicago, the impact is felt
disproportionately by Bismarck, Charleston, and all of the
other communities that connect to the system through our
network. That's why targeted deployment of NextGen to those
metropolitan areas and regions of the country where it's most
needed to address congestion and delays is to vitally
important.
Acceleration of NextGen is also a green initiative that
will yield benefits for the environment, because we'll be using
less fuel and reducing carbon emissions. United participated
with the FAA in a demonstration flight using some of the
procedures involved in NextGen. That one flight resulted in a
savings of over 1,500 gallons of fuel and almost 33,000 pounds
of CO2 emissions. Imagine the benefits of
implementing those procedures across the entire system each and
every day.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, it's time to act. All industry
stakeholders support moving NextGen forward now. With the
leadership of this committee, the Congress, and the
Administration, we can deliver key benefits of NextGen in the
next 3 to 5 years. This action will create jobs, enhance air
travel for our customers, and contribute to a cleaner
environment. In the 1950s, Congress and the Eisenhower
Administration built a new Federal highway infrastructure. It
was a national priority that took leadership and funding. Now's
the time to do the same thing for the Nation's aviation
infrastructure by delivering NowGen.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kolshak follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joe Kolshak, Senior Vice President--Operations,
United Airlines on Behalf of the Air Transport Association of America
Introduction
The time to jump-start air traffic control (ATC) system
modernization is now. A meaningful down payment over the next few years
will pay dividends in the form of greatly improved system performance
and corresponding public benefits.
The shortcomings of the existing ATC system are well known.
Technologically, it is outdated and limited in its capabilities. It
relies on ground-based radar for surveillance and navigation, and voice
communications to relay instructions between controllers and pilots.
Compared to modern and emerging technologies, our ATC system is slow
and cumbersome. These limitations force operational procedures such as
separation standards and indirect point-to-point routings that are
inefficient because they appropriately put safety first. Consequently,
as U.S. civil aviation has grown and become more complex--including
scheduled commercial, nonscheduled business, public and private
charter, air taxi and private recreational flying--the ATC system has
become strained and, in some geographic areas, overwhelmed. This is
especially true when severe winter or summer weather disrupts normal
operations. The result is congestion and delay for all system users,
unhappy passengers and shippers, and airlines who struggle to recover
normal operations and rebook passengers when forced to cancel flights.
The current ATC system limitations impose significant costs on our
society in general, and the airline industry in particular. The Joint
Economic Committee estimates air travel delays impose $41 billion
annually in costs on the U.S. economy.\1\ In the 12-month period ending
September 2008, 138 million system delay minutes drove an estimated $10
billion in direct operating costs for scheduled U.S. passenger airlines
and cost airline passengers an estimated $4.5 billion in lost wages and
productivity. These figures do not capture the costs of extra gates and
ground personnel to passenger airlines or the direct costs incurred by
cargo airlines and their customers. The airline industry cannot
survive, and the public will not invest in it, if these conditions
remain status quo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://jec.senate.gov/
index.cfm?FuseAction=Reports.Reports&ContentRecord_id=11116dd7-973c-
61e2-4874-a6a18790a81b&Region_id=&Issue_id=
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking forward, these problems will only worsen unless and until
change occurs. By 2025, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
forecasts there will be approximately 30,000 more operations per day
than the 2007 estimate of 44,000 daily operations. The current ATC
system cannot handle this projected future demand, even if the forecast
is reduced to account for current economic conditions. Even if the
forecasted growth is significantly reduced, today's ATC system is so
inefficient that it will not be able to handle a modest increase in
activity.
Why Is This Important?
The ATC system is a critical national infrastructure that serves
the American people and the commerce of the United States, and all
system users rely on it, especially the scheduled airline industry. The
airline industry is the foundation of the commercial aviation sector,
which comprises airlines, airports, manufacturers and associated
vendors. U.S. commercial aviation ultimately drives $1.1 trillion per
year in U.S. economic activity and 10.2 million U.S. jobs. By any
measure, the U.S. airline industry is a valuable national asset and its
continued economic health should be a matter of national concern.
Without a modern, efficient ATC system, the airline industry will
slowly strangle, U.S. commerce and productivity will be impaired and
U.S. businesses will not be able to compete effectively in the global
economy. For these reasons, modernizing the ATC system now is
critically important to the growth and competitiveness of our economy.
ATC Modernization--NextGen--Will Provide Critically Needed Benefits
The FAA ATC modernization project--the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen)--will usher in a new era of air traffic
management and control that promises enormous benefits for all
stakeholders and the American people. Public benefits include improved
operational efficiency, reduced fuel consumption and emissions and
lower operating costs for airlines. ATA strongly supports NextGen
because it addresses numerous critical needs:
Capacity. The current ATC system is saturated and, in some
locations, cannot provide the capacity to meet public demand
for convenient, safe air transportation. This situation
inhibits competition and industry growth. It also is the source
of unnecessary congestion and delays, and compounds the effect
of weather-related delays. NextGen will enable more precise
spacing of aircraft and flight paths, which will allow FAA to
handle safely and efficiently the traffic growth that it
forecasts.
Efficiency and Productivity. NextGen will enable more
efficient flying. Today's ground-based radar system requires
planes to fly over specific points on the ground to maintain
radar and communications contact. Navigational aids, radar and
controllers are all terrestrial. They are linked to form a
complex network system that supports airways, through which
aircraft fly. Today's system also requires spacing to
accommodate the time it takes for radar to detect objects.
Consequently, aircraft fly indirect routings and aircraft
spacing--required for safety--wastes capacity. Today's ATC
system cannot, and never will be able to, take full advantage
of available technology or integrate and fully exploit emerging
technology.
The environmental and economic impact of today's inefficient ATC
system is illustrated below. The flight in this example burned
an additional 1,493 pounds of fuel (218 gallons). This added an
extra 4,560 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) that was
released into the air and cost the carrier an extra $688 in
fuel (given razor-thin margins, this is significant).
In contrast to today's ATC system, NextGen will enable: optimized,
direct routings between airports; reduced aircraft spacing;
continuous descent arrivals, precise arrival and departure
routings (known as RNAV and RNP procedures), and closely spaced
approaches on parallel runways in instrument flight rule
conditions. These are just a few of the operational benefits of
NextGen.
These efficiency enhancements will drive significant improvements
in productivity--both in terms of asset utilization and
personnel. That, in turn, will reduce operating costs, which
will help keep fares down and enable those savings to be plowed
back into wages and benefits and operating capital.
Improved ATC efficiency also will benefit private aircraft owners.
Corporations use private aircraft with the expectation that
such use is efficient. While we disagree with that proposition,
ATC modernization will provide corporate aircraft owners the
same kind of efficiency benefits that commercial airlines will
enjoy if their aircraft are properly equipped. Even if they are
not properly equipped, they still will enjoy a spin-off benefit
simply from operating in the same airspace as more efficient
commercial aircraft.
Environmental Benefits. More efficient operations also will
use less fuel, increasing aircraft fuel efficiency and reducing
greenhouse gas and other emissions. It was estimated initially
that full implementation of NextGen would reduce emissions
significantly. The environmental benefits of ATC modernization
are real and important. Improved fuel efficiency also will
reduce operating costs and contribute to improved financial
conditions that, like the productivity improvements discussed
above, will benefit the public and employees.
Operational Integrity and Customer Satisfaction. Closely
linked to capacity, efficiency and productivity is operational
integrity. By expanding capacity and enabling more efficient
operations, NextGen will enable better on-time performance and
improved customer satisfaction. Today's outdated ATC system
contributes to delays and disruptions, such as unnecessary
weather-related delays, that could be avoided and will be
avoided when NextGen is implemented. With improved operational
integrity comes fewer delays, fewer missed connections, fewer
misplaced checked bags and more satisfied customers.
Safety. The NextGen satellite-based system will look and act
much like a network to which aircraft and ATC are
interconnected. It will provide more precise information to
both controllers and pilots about aircraft locations, both in
the air and on the ground, and will enable aircraft to
constantly know one another's locations. This locational
awareness and corresponding digital communications capability
will provide critical real-time flight status information not
available today. Some of the technology and operating
procedures already have been tested and produced dramatic
results. A sharp drop in aircraft accidents in Alaska occurred
under the Capstone Program, introduced earlier this decade,
which utilizes ADS-B technology, a foundational technology for
NextGen.
Scalability. NextGen will be considerably more nimble than
today's facility- and labor-intensive system. Accordingly, it
will be much easier for the FAA to scale the system to meet
demand from all aviation sectors, whether that demand is a
steady growth curve or fluctuates from time to time. Automation
and digital data communications will make it easier for the FAA
to adjust the system as needed.
Improved Financial Performance. Modernization will respond
to legitimate shareholder expectations that the airlines they
invest in will earn a positive return on investment. The
current ATC system hobbles the industry's ability to achieve
financial stability because of the costs it drives by being
inefficient. As noted above, these failures lead to costly
delays and congestion.
The Current NextGen Plan--Delayed Benefits
While we strongly support NextGen, the current FAA plan does not
produce significant benefits--the capacity, efficiency and economic
benefits described above--for the traveling and shipping public or for
system users until 2025. For system users--airlines, business aviation
and general aviation--this delay presents a special problem. The plan
contemplates significant stakeholder investment, in addition to FAA
investment, but no real benefit for many years. Without a timely return
on investment, there is little incentive for airlines and other users
to invest in new equipment and training. In short, the current FAA plan
does not make a strong business case. Airlines, air taxis, charter
operators and corporate aircraft owners have a fiduciary responsibility
to their shareholders and owners to achieve a reasonable return on
their investment in this context, just as they do with respect to any
other major capital expense.
This is particularly troublesome given the fragile state of the
U.S. airline industry. 2008 saw U.S. airlines lose an estimated $8
billion (final, audited results are not yet available) on top of the
$31 billion lost since 2000. Airlines reduced operations sharply and
were forced to slash 28,000 jobs in 2008; additional reductions are
already in place for 2009 and softening demand will require even
further reductions as carriers continue to cut back operations. Should
jet fuel prices move sharply upward, the industry could easily see 2009
losses approaching the magnitude of losses in 2008.
The NextGen Solution: Accelerate Ready Capabilities to Drive Early
Benefits
There is a real and achievable solution, and that is to advance the
point in time when the investment in NextGen begins to pay off for both
the public and vested stakeholders. If the public and aviation
stakeholders begin to realize the benefits in a few years instead of 10
or more, then the NextGen business case improves dramatically.
To accomplish this critical shift, the government must accelerate
its near-term investment in NextGen, with a corresponding reduction in
later years, in order to leverage existing technology in the near term.
This investment will stimulate accelerated manufacture and installation
of ground infrastructure facilities, required avionics, and development
and certification of new operations procedures. This proposal includes
only those elements that are proven and ready to deploy:
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)--ADS-B is
a critical component of NextGen. By relying upon satellite and
additional technology, ADS-B enables an aircraft to constantly
broadcast its current position simultaneously to air traffic
controllers and other aircraft. Tremendous safety, security,
capacity and environmental improvements are realized. Unlike
ground radars, ADS-B offers much more precise data on an
aircraft's position in the sky or on the runway, including
altitude, category of aircraft, airspeed and identification.
ADS-B has two components. ADS-B ``Out'' and ``In''. ADS-B
``Out'' continuously transmits an aircraft's position, altitude
and intent to controllers. ADS-B ``In'' is the reception of the
transmitted data by other aircraft, which allows pilots to have
a complete picture of their aircraft in relation to other
traffic, both in the air and on the ground. ADS-B has the
potential to reduce delays, reduce fuel burn through more
efficient routings, and increase capacity--all while improving
safety. The current FAA plan does not mandate deployment until
2020.
Area Navigation (RNAV)--enables aircraft to fly on any path
within coverage of ground or space-based navigation aids,
permitting more access and flexibility for efficient point-to-
point operations. Aircraft are already equipped but
accompanying arrival and departure procedures have not been
adequately developed.
Required Navigation Performance (RNP)--like RNAV, RNP
enables aircraft to fly on any path within coverage of ground-
or space-based navigation aids, but also includes an onboard
performance monitoring capability; RNP enables closer en route
spacing without intervention by air traffic control, and
permits more precise and consistent departures/arrivals.
Electronic Display Upgrades--will allow the display of
traffic information that becomes available with ADS-B
deployment and reduce the risk of runway incursions. Whether
upgrades to existing forward displays or the addition of a
supplemental display (such as an Electronic Flight Bag), users
will be able to see other traffic while taxiing and have access
to surface navigation tools, electronic versions of airport
maps and pilot handbook materials.
Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS)--GBAS is the next-
generation technology to support precision landings. It
provides additional information to aircraft to allow GPS to be
used for landings in low-visibility conditions. This minimizes
schedule disruptions due to weather, and also enables more
environmentally friendly procedures and increased safety during
ground operations.
In addition to accelerating the government's investment in NextGen,
we also propose targeted deployment to those metropolitan areas and
regions of the country where it is most needed to address congestion
and delays, such as Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York/
Philadelphia and Atlanta. Deploying these capabilities in high-value
locations before expanding to other areas will maximize NextGen
benefits for the greatest number of people.
To support the earliest possible delivery of benefits and further
investment by carriers, we also endorse the FAA ``best equipped/best
served'' principle included in the governing principles of the NextGen
2009 Implementation Plan. Under this principle, consistent with safe
and efficient operations, FAA will provide priority in the National
Airspace System to Next-Gen equipped aircraft.
Accelerated and targeted deployment will produce significant
benefits for the flying public in terms of airspace capacity and
efficiency. It will lead to improved reliability and on-time
performance, thereby greatly diminishing (if not eliminating) the
single biggest source of the public's dissatisfaction with flying. It
should also drive improvements in other customer service areas such as
checked baggage delivery and long taxi-out times.
Other Challenges Also must Be Overcome to Realize NextGen Benefits
Investment, equipment and technology development/deployment are
critical to delivering the benefits that NextGen promises. But they are
not the only critical factors. The operational, environmental and
economic benefits of NextGen can still be lost, and the investment in
equipment and technology wasted, if other important challenges are not
met head-on by the FAA. It is essential that each FAA organization
executes its NextGen responsibilities in a timely fashion and that they
all work together pursuant to a coordinated and unified strategy that
prioritizes NextGen implementation. These challenges include:
Promptly complete airspace redesign. FAA has underway a
major overhaul of the NY/NJ/PHL airspace that is essential to
improving the flow of traffic into, out of and through these
metropolitan areas. It will significantly improve operational
efficiency in this region and the entire NAS. Because it
changes noise patterns, however, it has met stiff local
political and public opposition and is the subject of multiple
legal challenges. It is imperative that FAA push through these
political and legal challenges and stay the course. And it must
stay the course as it implements airspace redesign initiatives
elsewhere in the NAS, such as Chicago, Denver and the West
Coast corridor.
Develop new separation standards and approve new operations
procedures. For NextGen to deliver new capacity and efficiency,
the FAA must develop new, reduced separation standards that
take advantage of NextGen technological capabilities. In
addition to separation standards, FAA also must establish
criteria for the development and approval of new operations
procedures such as simultaneous operations on closely spaced
parallel runways, curved approaches, multiple precise departure
paths, continuous descent approaches and optimized profile
descents. Bureaucratic roadblocks and turf battles must be
avoided. Inconsistent application of separation standards at
the air traffic control facility level needs to be addressed.
New standards and procedures must be viewed as going hand in
glove with new technology.
Controller acceptance and implementation of new procedures.
FAA must partner with its controller workforce and make them
part of the NextGen process. If controllers do not accept new
separation standards and utilize new precision operations
procedures, then the equipment investment for NextGen will be
wasted. FAA must find a way to resolve the contract dispute
with the controllers, which to date has served as a roadblock
to controller input into NextGen development.
Maintain a sufficient constellation of satellites to meet
FAA safety standards. There is an assumption that the GPS
satellite constellation servicing NextGen surveillance,
navigation and communications functions will be adequate to
meet stringent FAA safety standards. However, in some models,
the minimum number of satellites FAA assumes for its
performance-level safety analysis is not sufficient. FAA and
the Department of Defense must come to agreement on the minimum
satellites needed for NextGen to provide the performance level
required by FAA safety criteria, and Congress must provide the
necessary funds.
Conclusion
We have arrived at a pivotal moment for U.S. aviation. Industry
stakeholders support the FAA NextGen program--an event not to be
overlooked--and the FAA has developed a comprehensive implementation
plan with clear benefits. The plan needs to be accelerated by an
immediate boost in funding to jump-start equipment deployment on the
ground and in the air. We urge the Subcommittee to make the rapid,
successful implementation of NextGen happen now.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Kolshak, thank you very much.
Next, we will hear from Dale Wright, who is the Director of
Safety and Technology at the National Air Traffic Controllers
Association.
Mr. Wright?
STATEMENT OF DALE WRIGHT, DIRECTOR OF SAFETY
AND TECHNOLOGY, NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Wright. Thank you, Chairman Rockefeller, Chairman
Dorgan, and Ranking Member DeMint, for the opportunity to
testify.
I retired as an air traffic controller, in September 2007,
with 32 years experience. I'd first like to state unequivocally
that NATCA supports NextGen, and we believe that NATCA must be
an active participant in its development.
According to the GAO, NextGen is a high-risk effort. It is
highly complex, has many interdependent projects, requires a
large investment of money, time, and other resources, but it is
imperative, for both the safety of the NAS and the investment
of the taxpayer dollars, that this project be undertaken in the
right way.
First and foremost, the FAA must collaborate with users and
stakeholders. Collaboration with NATCA is especially important,
as our members will be the primary users of NextGen technology.
Because of their front-line air traffic control experience,
NATCA members are best qualified to provide insight into the
needs of the system. Doing so on the front end rather than the
back end will save the agency time and taxpayer money, and
result in a better product.
In Europe, EuroControl has undertaken a modernization
projected called SESAR, which is similar in size and scope to
NextGen. Leaders of EuroControl recognize the importance of
including front-line air traffic control workforce into this
project's development. Unfortunately for NextGen, the FAA's
taking the opposite approach. Although NATCA has reached out
many times to offer our expertise, the FAA has rejected our
offers. They made it abundantly clear they do not value the
professional knowledge and expertise that NATCA brings to the
table.
So strong is our commitment to the success of NextGen that
when it became clear to us that NATCA would have no direct
involvement with the FAA, we sought inclusion indirectly
through private-sector industry workgroups. The private-sector
aviation community, recognizing the benefits of our inclusion,
welcomed us with open arms. At last week's House Aviation
Subcommittee hearing on NextGen, representatives of both ATA
and GAMA testified about the importance of controller
involvement throughout the development and implementation of
NextGen.
Thus far, the FAA's go-it-alone strategy has yielded
results that are incomplete, unsafe, and ineffective. For
example, the FAA has refused to work with NATCA on the subject
of airspace redesign for the New York, New Jersey, and
Philadelphia metropolitan areas. As a result, phase one of the
program, dispersal headings out of Philadelphia, was
implemented with serious flaws. Rather than learn a lesson from
phase one, the FAA is set to implement phase two, which
involves more significant changes to airspace and procedure,
still without NATCA involvement.
Our experience with the End Route Automation
Modernization--that's ERAM project--seems to be heading the
same direction. NATCA believes ERAM is necessary for the future
of air traffic control. Once perfected, ERAM will handle
significantly a larger volume of data and provide a more
seamless backup than the current system. However, less than 2
months ago, officials on the ERAM team disclosed that ERAM had
yet to remain stable and functional for a full 24 hours of
continuous operational testing.
Earlier this month, the FAA asked NATCA for assistance in
addressing the 109 critical errors facing ERAM. We had hoped
this gesture of outreach signified a change in agency policy,
but thus far we've run into the familiar obstructionism. At
this time, it is unclear whether the agency intends to work
with NATCA, but we remain eager to participate.
We would also like to work with the FAA to ensure that
NextGen incorporates the redundancies necessary for the system
in security of the NAS. The FAA's plans require transition to a
single-source satellite to provide navigation and surveillance
to the NAS. This leaves the system unacceptably vulnerable to
natural disaster, attack, or technological failure. The current
radar system has necessary redundancies. Should one radar site
fail, overlapping sites can provide surveillance without
compromising safety or interrupting service. Similar redundancy
must be incorporated into NextGen plans.
We'd also like to help ensure that the FAA effectively
addresses the human-factor issues brought about by NextGen.
Their proposed best-equipped, best-served incentive policy, for
example, significantly increases the complexity of ATC
operations, a particular concern with an understaffed and
inexperienced workforce operating the system. Such problems
should be mitigated and avoided entirely if the FAA would
collaborate with NATCA.
Last, we are eager to work with the FAA to address problems
facing the current air traffic control system. We must reach a
mutually acceptable collective bargaining agreement with the
FAA so that we can begin to address the staffing crisis that
continues to deepen. We've lost 46,000 years of experience in
the last 2\1/2\ years. Training has stalled and fatigue in the
workforce is undermining the safety throughout the system.
We at NATCA recognize the severity of the issues facing
today's air traffic control system, and we're eager to help the
FAA address the issues of system capacity, delays, safety, and
sustainability, but we also caution them not to abandon what we
call NowGen. The FAA must begin to look at the members of the
controller work force, not as an obstacle, but the valuable
resource they are.
This concludes my comments, and I stand by to answer any
questions you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wright follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dale Wright, Director of Safety and Technology,
National Air Traffic Controllers Association
Introduction
The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) is the
exclusive representative of more than 15,000 air traffic controllers
serving the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of
Defense and the private sector. In addition, NATCA represents
approximately 1,200 FAA engineers, 600 traffic management coordinators,
500 aircraft certification professionals, agency operational support
staff. regional personnel from FAA's logistics, budget, finance and
computer specialist divisions, and agency occupational health
specialists, nurses and medical program specialists. NATCA's mission is
to preserve, promote and improve the safety of air travel within the
United States, and to serve as an advocate for air traffic controllers
and other aviation safety professionals. NATCA has a long history of
supporting new aviation technology, modernizing and enhancing our
Nation's air traffic control system, and working to ensure that we are
prepared to meet the growing demand for aviation services.
NATCA's Recommendations
It is our understanding that this hearing is the first of several
on the topics covered by FAA Reauthorization. As this hearing is
focused on modernization, NATCA's remarks are intended to specifically
address the FAA's efforts in implementing the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen). We look forward to the opportunity to
testify before you in the future and are prepared to address the many
other important issues facing the FAA including the need for fair
dispute resolution between labor and management, realignment of FAA
facilities and services, staffing and the need for scientifically based
standards, the designee program and the FAA certification process, and
other topics.
NATCA remains, as ever, completely committed to the safety and
efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS). New technology has
the potential to improve safety, expand capacity, and increase
efficiency of the NAS. Therefore, we support the FAA's willingness to
undertake the large-scale and long-term research, development and
modernization project that it has labeled NextGen. Yet the complexity
and the risk of this program should not be underestimated. The GAO has
stated that NextGen is a high risk effort because of its dollar cost
and complexity.\1\ Therefore it is imperative that the FAA proceed in a
way which maximizes the chances of success. At present, there are
several outstanding shortcomings with the FAA's methodology and plans
that must be addressed at this early stage of the process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on
Aviation Summary of Subject Matter for hearing on Air Traffic Control
Modernization and the Next Generation Air Transportation System: Near-
Term Achievable Goals. March 16. 2009.
1. The FAA must collaborate meaningfully with stakeholders--The
inclusion of NATCA is critical to the success of NextGen and
all projects relating to modernization, technology and
procedures. The Government Accountability Office and the
Inspector General of the Transportation Department have both
testified before Congress that controller involvement prevents
cost overruns and implementation delays. NATCA must be included
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
in all stages, from inception to implementation.
2. NowGen must not be neglected as we prepare for NextGen--The
current air traffic control system has fallen into disrepair.
Both the human infrastructure, including staffing levels of air
traffic controllers, inspectors, engineers, and other aviation
safety professionals, and physical infrastructure, such as
poorly-maintained and deteriorating air traffic control
facilities, need attention in the near term.
3. Human factors must be addressed--Several of NextGen's
proposals raise serious concerns regarding human factors,
including the increased complexity and safety risk inherent in
a best equipped, best-served policy. These issues must be
addressed during the development stages in order to avoid
delays, cost overruns, and safety failures.
4. Safety requires redundancy--NATCA is concerned that the
system being proposed by the FAA, which is centralized and
lacking a viable backup, is unacceptably vulnerable to attack
or natural disaster. Human intervention must not be the first
and only layer of redundancy. The FAA must build redundancy
into the system in order to ensure that in the event of an
attack, natural disaster, or technological failure, safety is
not compromised.
Collaboration is Critical
The participation of NATCA throughout all stages of NextGen's
development and implementation is critical to the success of this
project. NATCA's members are frontline workers who are able to provide
vital insight to help the team identify and address human-interface
issues and other concerns. Doing so on the front end rather than during
implementation will save the Agency time, taxpayer money and resources
while avoiding potential damage to the integrity of the air traffic
control system. Because NATCA's members have an intimate understanding
of frontline air traffic control, they are uniquely qualified to
provide insight into the needs of the system, the utility of the FAA's
proposed technology, and the usability of the products included under
the NextGen umbrella. As Peter Bunce, President and CEO of General
Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) said, ``If we are going to
have full implementation [of NextGen] somewhere in the range of 2025,
it is absolutely imperative that we still get the controllers and
pilots together and decide what type of architecture is actually going
to exist in the end state.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Peter Bunce, President and CEO of GAMA, testimony before House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Subcommittee on Aviation.
March 18, 2008 hearing on ``ATC Modernization and NextGen: Near Term
Achievable Goals.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA's go-it-alone strategy has come under criticism throughout
the aviation industry. Last month, the FAA announced that it has
committed to launching a NextGen Implementation Panel, through the RTCA
Inc. (formerly the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics). Despite
this gesture, to date we have received no indication from the FAA that
the Agency has any intention of meaningfully collaborating with NATCA.
During the late 1990s and into the early part of this decade, the
FAA completed more than 7,100 projects to install and integrate new
facilities, systems and equipment into the NAS, as well as more than
10,000 hardware and software upgrades. During this time. NATCA had
representatives on more than 70 modernization and procedure development
projects \3\ through the Controller Liaison Program. This program
allowed controllers to provide crucial insight and guidance for the
development and implementation of some of the most effective
technological and procedural advancements including: Advanced
Technologies and Oceanic Procedures (ATOP), Display System Replacement
(DSR), User Request Evaluation Tool (URET), Voice Switching Control
System (VSCS), Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (DRVSM),
and Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS). Despite
its success, the Liaison Program was terminated in 2005. Throughout the
rest of the Bush Administration, the FAA resisted any meaningful input
from NATCA--to the detriment of the NAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ National Air Traffic Controllers Association, 2002 Air Traffic
Modernization Tools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The labor-management environment that developed during the Bush
administration continues to make meaningful collaboration nearly
impossible. The contempt with which all levels of agency management has
treated and continues to treat the air traffic controller workforce
makes it clear that the Agency does not value the professionalism of
NATCA's members. It is our hope that after the imposed work rules are
addressed by the Obama Administration and NATCA and the FAA reach a
mutually-accepted collective bargaining agreement, we can again return
to an era of cooperation and collaboration that will best serve the
needs of the FAA, air traffic controllers, stakeholders, and the flying
public.
Status of Near-Term NextGen Collaboration Efforts: ERAM
One of the earliest NextGen projects to be deployed will be the
switch from the Host computer system, which currently serves as the
technological backbone of en route air traffic control, to En Route
Automation Modernization (ERAM). Host, which was originally deployed in
the 1980s, is the mainframe computer processor which provides data to
display terminals at en route air traffic control positions. It is
expected to become unsustainable within the next 2 years, as the
availability of new technology has made replacement parts for older
computers harder to find. It is also incapable of handling the
satellite-based ADS-B system around which NextGen has been developed.
In contrast, ERAM is designed to process data from both radar and
satellite sources. Rather than rely on a single processor, ERAM will be
a network of computers in which the old Host display terminals will be
replaced by individual PC processors. Once it is properly implemented,
this distributive processing will allow the system to handle a
significantly larger volume of data and provide a more seamless backup
system then the one currently in place.
While NATCA supports ERAM as a good concept and necessary for the
future of air traffic control, confidence is low in the product in its
current state. ERAM testing has yielded more than 40,000 problem
reports (PRs), over 100 of which are considered to be Initial Operating
Capability (IOC) critical, meaning they must be resolved prior to
deploying the system for use with live traffic. As of less than 2
months ago, officials on the ERAM team disclosed that ERAM had yet to
remain stable and functional for a full twenty-four hours of continuous
operational testing. Additionally, air traffic controllers have come
across significant problems with the human interface of ERAM, as they
found the new formats cumbersome, confusing, and difficult to navigate.
NATCA is very concerned about the risk to the NAS if ERAM is
implemented before these problems are comprehensively addressed. Short-
term, piecemeal fixes or work-arounds are unacceptable. ERAM must be
deployed only when the technology is stable and fully functional
because failure of ERAM, particularly during peak traffic hours, would
create extreme confusion and put the safety of the flying public at
risk.
This February, the FAA has approached NATCA with what we hoped
would be a genuine invitation seeking our collaboration in the
implementation phase of ERAM. We embraced the opportunity to
substantively contribute to finding solutions cooperatively with the
FAA. Unfortunately, despite the Agency's repeated promises to work with
NATCA in a more collaborative manner on the ERAM issue, we are running
into the same obstructionist attitude that we have become so familiar
with over the last 8 years. NATCA has acted swiftly and eagerly,
submitting comprehensive proposals about the terms of our collaboration
within 9 days of receiving the full ERAM briefing from the Agency, and
we are prepared to work with the Agency to come to an agreement. For
their part the FAA has required weeks of delay to respond to our
proposals, while engaging in unfair labor practices in soliciting
bargaining unit members to work on the transition team. At this time,
it is unclear as to whether or not the Agency is prepared to reach
agreement or work with NATCA.
NATCA is disappointed with the Agency's stance on collaborating
with our organization. As with all NextGen and modernization efforts,
we believe that our expertise would serve the Agency and the flying
public well. We remain committed to continuing the effort to reach an
agreement with the Agency over the deployment of ERAM.
Status of Near-Term NextGen Collaboration Efforts: Airspace Redesign
In the 1990s, the FAA collaborated with the National Air Traffic
Controllers Association (NATCA) to address the issue of airspace
congestion. Working together the group identified chokepoints, analyzed
weaknesses in the system, and developed a multilateral and
comprehensive approach to improving the system. However, during the
Bush Administration the FAA abandoned this collaborative approach and
instead chose to unilaterally implement piecemeal changes to air
traffic control functions and procedures. Recent events pertaining to
airspace redesign for the New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia areas
have also shown that the FAA still does not intend to include NATCA in
this project.
Last year, the FAA implemented Phase 1 of the NY-NJ-PHL airspace
redesign effort, which included new dispersal headings for Philadelphia
International Airport (PHL) departures. These new procedures were
implemented without input from system users including air traffic
controllers. As a result, the new procedures were plagued by several
serious inadequacies, including a lack of published procedures,
incomplete testing, insufficient training for both controllers and
pilots, and frequent miscommunication between controllers and pilots.
Now the FAA is ready to begin implementation of Phase II, which
will involve the terminalization of airspace currently controlled by
Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) and New York ARTCC.
This shift is highly complex and will require changes not only to
procedures but also to technology, personnel, facilities and training.
Yet it appears that the FAA has not learned its lesson from Phase I.
Despite outreach attempts from NATCA, the FAA has refused to
collaborate with the frontline controller work force.
History has shown us that successful modernization efforts require
the input and involvement of all stakeholders, and airspace redesign is
no exception. NATCA believes that without the collaboration of the air
traffic controller workforce in developing and implementing the
airspace redesign, the FAA's plans will be expensive, unsafe,
inefficient, and unlikely to significantly improve the capacity of the
New York area airspace. This is a belief not limited to air traffic
controllers or unions. Jim May, President and CEO of the Air Transport
Association (ATA) spoke about the importance of ``controller acceptance
of implementation and new procedures'' at a hearing before the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation. Of airspace
redesign he said, ``you've got to bring Pat [Forrey, President of
NATCA] and his guys into the process . . . We can't do New York without
his folks.'' \4\ With NATCA's help, the FAA may be able to avoid the
shortcomings that were present during Phase I of airspace redesign and,
by so doing, may be able to transition more smoothly to the new
procedures and reduce the risk to the flying public during the
transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Jim May, President and CEO, Air Transport Association.
Testimony before House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
Subcommittee on Aviation. March 18, 2008 hearing on ``ATC Modernization
and NextGen: Near-Term Achievable Goals.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NowGen: Human Infrastructure
While NATCA believes that NextGen may hold some promising plans and
technology for the future of air traffic control, we are concerned that
the Agency's focus on NextGen comes at the expense of the current air
traffic control system, or NowGen. There are some very pressing
problems facing the air traffic control system of today that can be
addressed using available technology and infrastructure.
Air traffic control facilities across the Nation are severely
understaffed as a result of the wave of retirements and resignations
following the Agency's unilateral imposition of work and pay rules on
the air traffic controller work force. Rampant fatigue in the workforce
is undermining safety across the system as those controllers that
remain are required to work excessive amounts of overtime, have fewer
opportunities for rest on and off the shift, and are often required to
do a job designed for two to four controllers when Radar Associate
positions are eliminated and positions are combined. The FAA's recent
hiring efforts intended to combat the staffing problem have resulted in
an unsafe ratio of trainees, a training backlog, and an overreliance on
developmentals, or trainees, to work live traffic.
Over 46,000 years of experience has been lost since the imposed
work rules.\5\ Along with that experience, vital institutional
knowledge and qualified instructors have been sacrificed over the past
two and a half years. The FAA must make addressing the workforce issue
its top priority; returning to the bargaining table to reach a
legitimate and mutually-acceptable collective bargaining agreement
would go a long way toward stabilizing today's air traffic controller
workforce and setting a solid foundation for the training and
development of the air traffic controller workforce of tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Calculation assumes 25 years experience for every retiree.
Twenty-five years of services is the minimum for retirement eligibility
for most air traffic controllers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NowGen: Physical Infrastructure
In addition to the deterioration of the human infrastructure, the
FAA must contend with the deterioration of the physical infrastructure.
According to a recent report by the Department of Transportation
Inspector General, 59 percent of FAA facilities are beyond their 30-
year design life, while all 23 En Route centers are over 40 years old.
Several air traffic control facilities including Detroit Metropolitan
Airport Tower and TRACON (DTW), O'Hare International Airport Tower
(ORD), Kansas City Tower/TRACON (MCI), Miami ARTCC (ZMA), and Memphis
ARTCC (ZME) have reported problems with mold contamination. At DTW
inspectors have confirmed the presence of stachybotrys, a toxic form of
mold believed to be a contributory factor in health problems
experienced by controllers at the facility, including cases of
occupational asthma as well as seven cancer diagnoses during the past 6
years.
The FAA has also fallen behind in the installation of vital runway
incursion prevention technology. Airport Surface Detection Equipment-
Model X (ASDE-X) is a developed and proven surface radar system that
has been used to great effect where it has been installed.
Unfortunately, the FAA has allowed this demonstrated technology to take
a back seat to NextGen and is on track to miss its delivery benchmarks.
While the FAA estimated that ASDE-X would be deployed at the 35 busiest
airports by the end of 2010, to date they have installed only 13 of the
35 (having taken 4 years to install the first 11),\6\ and several of
those that have been installed are still experiencing serious
implementation glitches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Dillingham, Gerald, Aviation Safety: FAA Has Increased Efforts
to Address Runway Incursions. Government Accountability Office
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives September
25, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA must make the maintenance and appropriate equipage of
existing air traffic control facilities a priority. Air traffic
controllers must be provided with safe and secure facilities and up-to-
date equipment so that they can continue to maintain the safest and
most efficient air traffic control system in the world.
Potential Advantages of NextGen Technology and Systems
NATCA believes that there is great potential in Automatic Dependent
Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B). As the FAA has stated, satellite-based
technology is capable of providing a more accurate depiction of
aircraft location and eliminating the lag time of traditional radar
scans. This degree of precision can help ensure greater safety and
efficiency by allowing air traffic controllers the ability to make
better-informed decisions regarding aircraft movements. If aircraft
were equipped with ADS-B displays, pilots would have additional tools
with which to process and understand their location and flying
conditions, allowing pilots to maintain greater situational awareness,
particularly during periods of poor visibility.
This capability will give controllers greater flexibility and
provide predictability to the users. For example, controllers will be
able to more frequently instruct pilots to proceed to the airport
visually, utilizing the ADS-B in weather currently requiring instrument
flight rules (IFR). A visual approach, which is granted at the
discretion of air traffic controllers, requires pilots to utilize a
simple ``see and avoid'' method of separation, allowing then to follow
more closely than instrument guided approach standards permit. With
current technology, controllers may only grant visual approaches during
good weather and when visibility is unobstructed, as pilots must safely
see the runway, ground, surrounding terrain, and other aircraft in the
vicinity. With ADS-B displays, pilots would be able to artificially
``see'' other aircraft even during inclement weather, giving
controllers greater flexibility to use these less complex and more
efficient approach rules, increasing the arrival rates regardless of
the weather. There would no longer be a need to reduce arrival rates
during IFR weather. The users could more accurately predict scheduling,
reduce delays, and increase capacity.
Concerns over NextGen
Based on the public documents that the FAA has made available on
NextGen, NATCA has several outstanding concerns for both the long and
short term that we believe the FAA must address comprehensively before
it can begin the roll-out of any major NextGen technology or policy
changes. As previously stated, we believe that these and other issues
can be most effectively addressed in a collaborative environment, and
we sincerely hope that NATCA can be a part of developing the solutions
to the problems facing the current air traffic control system and plan
for the future system. Below are the concerns NATCA believes must be
addressed immediately, which will be discussed in greater depth in the
sections that follow.
1. The FAA must retain a backup system: Redundancy is the
essential element of any safety operation. The FAA's published
plans contain no viable backup should the satellite fail due to
natural or criminal activity. Limited frequency availability
further complicates this situation.
2. Safe and viable plan for equipage: The success of NextGen is
dependent on the equipage of thousands of aircraft with new
technology, an expensive undertaking that would be a major
financial strain on airlines, general aviation and business
aviation, particularly in the current economic climate. The FAA
has tried to address this by instituting a new ``best equipped,
best served'' policy for air traffic control. This policy has
serious implications for safety, as it adds an untenable level
of complexity to air traffic control operations. If the FAA
wishes to incentivize equipage, it must do so in a way that
does not compromise safety.
3. Full consideration of human factors: Many of the proposed
changes to the air traffic control system place significant
demands on the people who make the system work. The usability
of the technology and the accompanying procedures must be a
priority.
4. Research before rulemaking: Many of the plans and promises
made in the FAA's NextGen documents are based on assumptions
about technology that has yet to be developed. While the ideas
are a good basis for research and development projects, it is
misleading for the FAA to describe its plans for operations as
if the required technology were already available.
Redundancy: The Need for a Viable Backup System
While we believe ADS-B has tremendous potential and is capable of
providing precise, accurate, and instantaneous information on aircraft
positions to air traffic controllers, it is particularly vulnerable due
to its single-site source. ADS-B is satellite-based technology, with
information broadcasting from a single source satellite orbiting the
earth. While this allows it to be more precise than the current ground-
based radar, the singularity of its source makes it vulnerable to
natural disasters and criminal or terrorist acts. If the satellite were
to cease functioning for any reason, the entire U.S. air traffic
control system would be crippled.
The current ground-based radar system gathers its information from
numerous radar sights located throughout the country. If one radar
sight were to fail, another site could act as a back up. For example,
if a terminal radar site were to fail, Center Radar, or CENRAP, from
the nearest en route radar site would be able to provide the relevant
data. In most cases when this occurs, FAA separation requirements are
increased from three miles to five miles, but safety is maintained and
service is uninterrupted.
Until redundancy can be incorporated into the new technology, the
easiest option for creating the system redundancy necessary to maintain
the safety of the NAS is to maintain the existing ground radar coverage
as a backup for the ADS-B system. However, due to financial
considerations, the Agency wants to decommission many of the current
radar sites, which would result in an incomplete backup system with
gaps in coverage.
Further complicating this is the issue of frequency congestion.
ADS-B transmits its information in the same frequency spectrum as the
current radar systems, TCAS, ASDE-X, and other critical aviation safety
technology. There are simply not enough frequencies available to
transmit all of the necessary information. According to a briefing
before the Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) on February 24, 2009,
the FAA would have to decommission all existing radar sites and reduce
TCAS surveillance to 60 percent in order to safely utilize ADS-B \7\ in
future NextGen applications. This further limitation of the available
redundancy makes the NAS more vulnerable to failure and puts the safety
of the flying public at risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Capezzuto, Vincent, Surveillance and Broadcast Services:
Aviation Rulemaking Committee Briefing, Federal Aviation
Administration, February 24, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before ADS-B is implemented, the FAA must develop a safe and viable
means of providing a backup system. Redundancy and workable backup
systems are vital to the safety of the NAS, and must not be discounted
in the fervor to introduce new technology.
Near-term Redundancy Concerns: FAA Realignment Initiatives
In the near term, we have similar concerns regarding the loss of
redundancy due to facility and service realignment initiatives. By
proceeding recklessly with de-consolidation initiatives, the FAA has
delivered a serious blow to redundancy in knowledge and training. In
combined tower/Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facilities each
air traffic controller is trained on all aspects of arrivals and
departures. With this overlapping knowledge, controllers are able to
more safely and efficiently coordinate with one another and control
aircraft. The redundancy in training also gives managers more
flexibility in staffing. This redundancy is being removed through the
FAA's realignment initiatives, diminishing the safety and efficiency of
air traffic control operations and making facilities more vulnerable to
the effects of the staffing crisis.
The FAA is also moving forward on a number of consolidation
initiatives, in which the FAA would first split tower/TRACON functions
in current combined facilities and then consolidate the radar functions
into a larger facility. In these instances, not only is training and
knowledge redundancy sacrificed, but security also becomes a serious
concern. As with the single ADS-B site, consolidating air traffic
control facilities and eliminating radar capabilities at many airports
leaves regions vulnerable to attack, natural disaster or technological
malfunction. If a consolidated facility were to fail, not only would a
single airport be out of service, but the entire region would be shut
down to air travel as well.
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee recently
introduced the H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009, which
created a process for evaluating realignment decisions and involving
all stakeholders in the planning process. NATCA believes that this is
the correct approach and urges this Committee to include similar
language in their companion legislation. Working together, stakeholders
can help mitigate the redundancy loss and ensure that realignment
initiatives are undertaken only when they present an operational
benefit to users, improve safety, efficiency and capacity, while also
saving taxpayer money.
Equipage: A Major Hurdle in Tough Economic Times
In order to utilize the technology and procedures that create the
foundation of NextGen, aircraft must be equipped with new technology.
For general and business aviation, the process of equipage may be cost-
prohibitive. Encouraging voluntary compliance for these fliers may
prove to be a fruitless effort, and mandatory equipage may cripple the
general aviation industry beyond repair. One NATCA member and private
pilot echoed the sentiments of many when he said, ``I'll stop flying
before I spend $35,000 on new equipment for my $50,000 plane.''
Particularly during these difficult economic times, when private pilots
are struggling to pay for regular maintenance and fuel costs, the added
expense will be cost prohibitive to most.
For the commercial airline industry, moving forward with NextGen
means undergoing the expensive process of retrofitting a fleet of
aircraft, a major challenge for airlines struggling to continue
operations despite the economic downturn. Early equipage difficulties
may be exacerbated by the FAA's history of changing technological
requirements and delaying or abandoning modernization efforts. American
Airlines, for example, retrofitted its fleet to install the Controller
Pilot Data Link Communication system (CPDLC) only to see the FAA
abandoned its efforts in 2004, leaving the airline to foot the bill for
technology it would never use.
Airlines may be reluctant to equip their fleets until they can see
a clear operational or economic benefit and until the FAA has
demonstrated a firm commitment to a particular set of equipage
standards. NextGen will be delayed until the FAA is able to effectively
address the legitimate concern of airlines and aircraft owners and
convince them that the technology is a good investment.
``Best Equipped, Best Served'': Implications on Human Factors
In an attempt to create artificial economic incentives for early
equipage, the FAA has announced that it will implement a policy that
would ``provide `best-equipped, best-served' priority in the NAS to
early adopters.'' This has serious implications for safe and efficient
operations and for the workload and complexity for air traffic
controllers.
Currently, air traffic controllers provide service on a first-come,
first-serve basis. Air traffic controllers instruct aircraft to merge
onto airways or disburse to their destinations in the order which comes
most naturally, the order in which they arrive. Giving priority to
particular aircraft would require complex maneuvering on the part of
air traffic controllers, who would have to vector aircraft around one
another in order to give preferential treatment. This is an unnecessary
level of complexity introduced into the already complex air traffic
control environment. As with any additional complexity, it brings with
it an increased risk in terms of both safety and delays.
Air traffic controllers are also taught to maximize the efficiency
of the NAS to the maximum extent practicable without sacrificing
safety. This often means granting requests from pilots to proceed
directly to particular navigation points of reference, VORs, rather
than continuing along the prescribed route. Currently, this is done
whenever air traffic and weather conditions permit. As there is no way
to increase the use of these on-the-fly improvements to efficiency, the
only way to provide incentives is to instruct controllers to avoid
giving direct routes to aircraft without the new equipment. This means
decreasing the overall efficiency of the NAS, and increasing flight
delays for unequipped aircraft.
Lastly, differential treatment from air traffic control based on
level of equipage requires the controller to know the level of
equipage. This would mean an additional piece of information in an
already-cluttered data-block. According to a Civil Aerospace Medical
Institute (CAMI) study, the quantity of information in the display has
a direct relationship to the time it takes for a controller to scan
that display. Similarly, when a display is cluttered with information,
it takes additional time to scan and parse out the relevant data.\8\
Therefore. adding this additional information to the data blocks will
increase the complexity of air traffic control even before one accounts
for the preferential maneuvering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Xing, Jing, Information Complexity in Air Traffic Control
Displays, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation
Administration. September 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human Factors Considerations for ``Trajectory Management''
The FAA's NextGen plans include increased automation and eventual
self-separation of aircraft, resulting in a shift in the ``traditional
responsibilities and practices of pilots/controllers.'' Under the
proposed system, air traffic control would shift to what the FAA is
euphemistically referring to as ``Trajectory Management.'' Essentially,
air traffic controllers would discontinue active air traffic control
and shift instead to air traffic monitoring and route management. This
could have serious implications for the safety of the NAS.
Studies have shown that ``when acting as a monitor of an automated
system, people are frequently slow in detecting that a problem has
occurred that necessitates their intervention. Once detected,
additional time is also needed to determine the state of the system and
sufficiently understand what is happening in order to be able to act in
an appropriate manner. The extra time associated with performing these
steps can be critical, prohibiting performance of the very activity the
human is present to handle.'' \9\ Safe air traffic control depends on
the ability to quickly assess situations and make split second
decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Parasuraman, R. and Mustapha Mouloua, Automation and Human
Performance: Theory and Applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training and experience would also be a serious issue in this
scenario. After this changeover of duties is completed, it won't be
long before the system is staffed entirely by individuals with no
active air traffic control experience or on the job training. Even
those who might remain in the profession and remember active air
traffic control would quickly fall out of practice. Currently,
controllers and managers who are working off the floor are required to
work positions for 16 hours to maintain currency. Maintaining this
level of currency would be impossible should automated separation
become the standard. This too, would make it difficult for air traffic
monitors to safely perform air traffic control functions should
automated separation fail.
Research Before Rulemaking
At this stage of NextGen's progress, it is difficult to talk about
near-term benefits of the system. Although this Committee is justified
in looking for short-term improvements to help alleviate delays and
improve capacity of the NAS, NextGen may not be the best place to look.
Right now, NextGen is little more than a very ambitious research and
development project. While the technology being developed may
eventually produce great benefit to the system, it is misleading for
the FAA to speak of plans as if the technology already existed.
For example, on January 29 of this year, the FAA published a
PowerPoint presentation entitled ``Delivering NextGen: Trajectory Based
Operations.'' This document included statements such as ``ANSP uses
scheduling tools and trajectory based operations to assure a smooth
flow of traffic and increase the efficient use of airspace,'' \10\
implying the availability of 4-D scheduling tools (three traditional
directions plus time) that are, in fact, still in the early stages of
developments. It is still unknown when these scheduling tools will be
fully developed or even how they will function, yet the FAA continues
to publish descriptions of how flight paths will be changed and how the
new procedures will look.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Federal Aviation Administration, Delivering NextGen:
Trajectory Based Operations, January 29, 2009, pg 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To create and outline the procedures at this early stage of the
development process is both disingenuous and irresponsible. The FAA is
misleading its stakeholders into thinking the process is already
further along than it actually is. It is also spending time, money and
manpower developing procedures and plans when it is unknown precisely
how the necessary tools will function. This means that FAA is either
developing broad and non-specific procedures, which are largely useless
except as a public relations tool, or they are developing specific
procedures which will likely need to be rebuilt once the technology is
available.
Conclusion
In NextGen, the FAA has undertaken a large-scale and long-term
research and development project to overhaul the technological
infrastructure of the air traffic control system. This ambitious
undertaking has serious implications for the future of the National
Airspace System and should therefore include the meaningful
participation of all NAS stakeholders.
NATCA supports the FAA's modernization efforts and is eager to be a
part of the team developing and planning the technology that will bring
us into the next generation of air traffic control. We look forward to
working with the FAA to help them address the serious outstanding
issues including human factors, equipage and redundancy concerns. It is
essential for us to be included as partners in this ongoing
modernization effort.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Wright, thank you very much.
Finally, we will hear from Mr. Kallenbach, the Vice
President of Marketing at Honeywell Aerospace. And he had been
recommended to us, as well, from the generation aviation
community for his testimony. So, we welcome you here.
STATEMENT OF T. K. KALLENBACH, VICE PRESIDENT
MARKETING AND PRODUCT MANAGEMENT
HONEYWELL AEROSPACE
Mr. Kallenbach. Chairman Dorgan, Ranking Member DeMint,
Chairman Rockefeller, Members of the Subcommittee, good
morning. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on and
discuss the future of air traffic management.
I think we can all agree, our Nation's air traffic control
system is incapable of meeting the growing demands for air
transportation, and it is in need of true transformation. In
fact, as the fifth member of this panel, I think we all agree,
we do need to transform it.
Further, we should be able to agree, government and
industry, working together, have demonstrated advanced
operational capabilities that could reduce today's congestion,
improve safety, and expand capacity ahead of growing demand.
Working together with this committee, we know we can transform
our air traffic system, yet as a nation we have been unable to
broadly implement these capabilities and systematically reduce
congestion. And in our minds, waiting until 2025 is simply
unacceptable.
The next-generation air transportation system, or NextGen,
must be a national priority with the necessary leadership,
commitment, and resources to act and make it a reality.
We know civil aviation is a key economic driver in our
country. This strong economic impact is a result of America's
historical leadership in aviation, leadership since the advent
of flight. NextGen provides us with another opportunity to
continue our leadership by implementing technologies,
standards, and procedures that can transform the world's air
traffic system.
We are positioned to be a global leader in air traffic
modernization, but if we do not act, we will relinquish that
position. Leadership requires action, implementation requires
action, global harmonization requires action.
In the 2003 FAA Reauthorization Bill, Congress created the
Joint Planning and Development Office to establish a vision and
the initial plan for NextGen. It is now time to implement that
vision. And for this, we need to transform the organizational
approach.
Because of NextGen's complexity and scope, it is critical
to centralize the overall planning and execution
responsibility. We need a single NextGen implementation office,
with strong leadership, direct accountability for the
successful deployment of NextGen. And this central office must
be measured with metrics that reflect our system performance,
not measure the implementation activity.
For example, rather than measuring the number of new
runways, we should measure the operations per day on the
existing runways. Rather than measuring on-time arrivals, which
are typically enhanced by block-time expansion, we should
measure gate-to-gate times. Rather than measuring RNP
procedures published by the FAA, we should measure the number
of operations and the savings created by flying those
procedures.
Equally important, this central office must have visibility
to accomplish its mission, including coordination with NextGen
contributions from partner agencies, industry, and global
harmonization.
At the same time this office is being mobilized, we need to
accelerate the deployment of capabilities that are fully
available today and that we know will be an important part of
the evolving NextGen system. These capabilities include
Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast, or ADS-B, Required
Navigation Performance, or RNP, Continuous Descent Arrivals, or
CDA, and Ground-Based GPS Augmentation Systems, or GBAS.
And just to touch on a couple of examples of how these are
being applied today, over a 12-month period Qantas flew more
than 8,000 RNP procedures into Brisbane, Australia, saving a
total of 42,000 flight minutes--excuse me--4,200 flight
minutes, 65,000 gallons of fuel, and 685 tons of CO2
emissions. SAS airlines has flown more than 1,300 continuous
descent arrivals to Arlanda, Sweden, with a total savings of
78,000 gallons of fuel and 830 tons of CO2
emissions. In our written submission, we've included a number
of other examples of real savings.
NextGen can fuel America's economic growth, lower energy
use, and protect our environment. It also affords us an
opportunity to be a leader in the development of the global
aviation infrastructure.
We cannot wait until 2025 for results. Improvements are
needed today, and solutions are on the shelf, waiting to be
deployed.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to conclude by offering four
specific recommendations for consideration:
First, in 2009 establish and fund a centralized NextGen
implementation office, fully accountable for implementation.
Two, accelerate ADS-B OUT forward to 2015 from its current
2020, and provide funding that satisfies the cost-benefit
analysis.
Three, install GBAS technology in the top 20 most congested
airports by 2011, and the top 50 most congested airports by
2013.
And fourth, and final, set and measure RNP adoption rates,
beginning in 2009, with a 20-percent year-over-year increase
until 90 percent of commercial flights are using RNP
procedures.
Our shared vision for NextGen is clear. There is broad
industry and government agreement on the technologies and the
path forward. The aviation industry looks to the Congress and
the FAA for the focused leadership and action to implement
NextGen.
Thank you, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kallenbach follows:]
Prepared Statement of T. K. Kallenbach, Vice President, Marketing and
Product Management, Honeywell Aerospace
NextGen Must Be a National Priority
We know that our Nation's air traffic control system is incapable
of meeting the growing demand for air transportation and is in need of
a true transformation. Incremental change in today's world of
satellites and computer power is simply unacceptable. Government and
industry stakeholders have developed and demonstrated new operational
capabilities, enabled by new technologies, that could keep airport and
airspace capacity ahead of demand. Yet, as a nation, we have been
unable to implement these changes fast enough to eliminate system
inefficiencies and the resulting congestion and delays. None of us can
sit on our hands and wait for someone to provide ``the answers,'' as it
is incumbent on all of us to work together to transform our aviation
system. Whatever the obstacle--process, laws, regulations, funding--
each must be attacked immediately. This Subcommittee will confront this
issue head on as you craft the next FAA authorization bill--and we urge
you to develop proposals that will truly drive the kind of ATC system
that we know can be built and installed today. Waiting until 2025, as
some plans call for, is simply not acceptable to everyone who flies,
and every person connected with the aviation industry.
The benefits of change are clear--in terms of economic and
environmental benefits and the impact on travelers. It is time that we
make the implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation
System (NextGen) a national priority and provide the necessary
leadership, commitment, and resources to make it a reality.
Specifically, we recommend:
Establishing clear and strong leadership, including a fully
responsible and accountable NextGen Implementation Office.
Accelerating the wide-scale deployment of available
capabilities including Automatic Dependent Surveillance--
Broadcast (ADS-B), Required Navigation Performance (RNP),
Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA), and the Ground-Based
Augmentation System (GBAS).
NextGen is a Key Element of the U.S. Transportation Infrastructure
There has been a great deal of discussion recently on the urgent
need to revitalize our Nation's infrastructure. Much of that attention
has been focused on our roads and bridges, rail networks, and
telecommunications--critical components, to be sure. Aviation's
contribution to our infrastructure is just as important, however, and
air traffic management is a foundational element of that
infrastructure.
Airports are the most visible component of the aviation
infrastructure. Revitalization of airports via new or upgraded terminal
buildings, taxiways, and runways provides tangible evidence of
congestion relief. The rest of the infrastructure--the ``highways in
the sky'', with the ``on-ramps'' and ``off-ramps'' that connect our
Nation's airports--is less easily visualized and yet key to the
efficient operation of the air transportation system. Adding ``lanes''
to these ``highways'' and more efficient ``on-ramps'' and ``off-ramps''
doesn't involve pouring concrete, but rather requires implementing
advanced, yet existing, technologies, including: space-based
navigation, digital communications, automation and advanced displays
supporting air traffic controller and pilot decision-making. This
virtual infrastructure, implemented via software and electronics
instead of concrete and steel, demands equal attention as a national
priority.
NextGen is a Strong Engine for the U.S. Economy
Aviation's impact on the U.S. economy cannot be understated. The
FAA estimates that civil aviation contributes 11 million jobs and $1.2
trillion in economic activity, amounting to 5.6 percent of the U.S.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP).\1\ On the other hand, the Congressional
Joint Economic Committee calculates that the cost of air traffic delays
to the U.S. economy in 2007 was $41 billion.\2\ To put this in
perspective, rough estimates of the total cost of implementing the
NextGen system have been on the order of $50 billion--a little more
than 1 year's cost of the delays NextGen can and should eliminate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Economic Impact of Civil Aviation on the Economy, FAA,
October 2008.
\2\ Your Flight Has Been Delayed Again--Flight Delays Cost
Passengers, Airlines, and the U.S. Economy Billions, Joint Economic
Committee Majority Staff, Chairman--Senator Charles E. Schumer, Vice
Chairman--Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, May 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aviation is also a strong contributor to the U.S. balance of trade.
In 2007, aerospace contributed $61 billion in net exports,\3\ the top
industry performer. This strong economic driver is a result of
America's historical leadership in aviation--leadership that has
existed since the advent of flight. NextGen provides us with an
opportunity to maintain that leadership by developing, demonstrating,
and implementing the technologies, standards, and procedures that will
transform the world's air traffic systems. Alternatively, if we choose
to not act aggressively, we stand to be eclipsed as other regions,
including Europe, Australia, and China, move to deploy new systems to
meet their growing air transportation needs. We are positioned to be a
global leader in air traffic management modernization, but if we do not
act, we will relinquish that position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Economic Impact of Civil Aviation on the Economy, FAA,
October 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NextGen Will Have a Positive Environmental Impact
Our aging air traffic system also has a significant impact on
energy use and the environment. The aviation industry continues to make
great strides in improving the efficiency of aircraft operations. Over
the past 30 years, airlines have more than doubled their average fuel
economy.\4\ The industry continues to invest in more efficient
airframes, engines, and systems, with a laser focus on reducing
operating costs and achieving carbon-neutral industry growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Measured in Revenue Passenger Miles per Gallon of Fuel--Air
Transport Association, http://www.airlines.org/economics/energy/
fuel+efficiency.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, the air traffic system in which we are required
to operate creates inefficiencies that are estimated to be between 10
and 15 percent. For the airlines alone, this inefficiency resulted in
more than 10 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted
unnecessarily in 2008. This is equivalent to the annual emissions from
the electrical use of more than 1.2 million U.S. households. This does
not have to be the case; these emissions are preventable.
Technologies and Procedures can be Deployed to Save Fuel and Reduce
Emissions
Required Navigation Performance, Continuous Descent Arrivals, and
Ground-Based Augmentation Systems are three technologies that have been
shown to provide significant environmental benefits. Operational use of
these capabilities should be accelerated.
Required Navigation Performance and Continuous Descent Arrivals are Key
Technologies
Performance-based navigation using Required Navigation Performance
(RNP) and Area Navigation (RNAV) relies on Global Positioning System
(GPS) and inertial navigation technology to allow aircraft to fly
accurate paths independent of classical ground-based navigation
infrastructure. This enables flight paths between cities that are more
direct, with fewer miles flown, and approach and departure procedures
that are shorter and involve little, if any, intervention from air
traffic controllers. The result is significant decreases in distance
and time flown.
Practical, ``real world'' demonstrations of RNP's effectiveness
abound:
Australia's Qantas Airlines, for example, has its fleet of
Boeing 737s flying more than 100 RNP procedures each day. These
procedures in Brisbane alone cut approximately 15 miles and
more than 1,600 pounds of CO2 emissions on every
approach.
Southwest Airlines recently operated a Boeing 737
demonstration roundtrip between Dallas Love Field and Houston
Hobby using RNP procedures, yielding 904 lb. of carbon dioxide
savings, part of its $175 million program to implement RNP
fleet-wide.
Since 2005, Alaska Airlines, an early RNP pioneer, has
documented 5,300 flights that avoided diversions by using RNP
procedures. In 2008, these ``saves'' resulted in cost savings
of $8 million.
Another procedural improvement that relies on the use of RNP is
Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA). These procedures couple the lateral
accuracy provided by RNP with the vertical accuracy provided by the
aircraft's Flight Management System (FMS) and flight controls. The
flight path is coordinated with air traffic control via data link
communications. The resulting descent is flown from cruise altitude to
final approach with few, if any, level segments and the engines
operating continuously at or near idle power.
UPS uses these procedures at Louisville, with reported
savings of between 250 and 465 pounds of fuel (37-69 gallons,
780-1456 pounds of CO2) per arrival.
SAS Airlines have flown more than 1300 Continuous Descent
Arrivals to Arlanda, Sweden, with average fuel savings of 410
pounds of fuel (60 gallons, 1279 pounds CO2) per
arrival.
Figure 1--Southwest Airlines operations between Dallas and Houston
(Yellow--Non-RNP ground tracks; Red--RNP direct route)
Figure 2--CDA versus a classical ATC ``step down'' descent profile
Combining the benefits of RNP and CDA over the entire flight
magnifies the benefits. This has been demonstrated in trials on both
trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific routes. In the Pacific, the Asia and
South Pacific Initiative to Reduce Emissions (ASPIRE) has sponsored
several flights between Australia/New Zealand and the U.S. An Air New
Zealand Boeing 777 flying from Auckland to San Francisco shaved 5
minutes off the flight and saved 1200 gallons of fuel, producing 11.5
metric tons less CO2.
Figure 3--ASPIRE Versus a Traditional Flight Profile
Ground-Based Augmentation System Reduces Costly Diversions
The GPS Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS) is the next-
generation precision landing system technology, a 21st century
alternative to the 1950s-era Instrument Landing System (ILS) currently
in operation. GBAS technology utilizes a ground system installed at an
airport to identify and correct small errors in GPS satellite signals
and transmits this information to arriving and departing aircraft. This
high-integrity, extremely precise positioning data is coupled with
GBAS-provided approach paths and aircraft avionics to guide the
aircraft to the runway in low visibility conditions.
Due to limitations with current ILS equipment, airports routinely
lose capacity as visibility decreases. Fifteen of our top U.S. airports
experience greater than 25 percent reduced capacity when ceilings are
below 200 feet.\5\ In these situations, aircraft are often forced to
wait in holding patterns--burning extra fuel or even worse, diverted to
alternate airports. GBAS technology provides precision approach
capability to all runway ends, maximizing airport capacity in all
visibility conditions and minimizing delays and diversions--ultimately
saving fuel and reducing emissions--while also contributing to a safer
operating environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Airport Capacity Benchmark Report 2004, FAA.
Figure 4--GBAS provides many benefits in the airport terminal area
The Need to Establish a NextGen Implementation Office
In the last FAA reauthorization bill, Vision 100--Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003, Congress created the Joint
Planning and Development Office (JPDO) to coordinate across government
and industry stakeholders, establish a NextGen vision and operational
concept, and develop an integrated plan for its deployment. JPDO has
since successfully achieved these objectives.
It is now time to implement NextGen. And for this, we need to
rethink the organizational approach.
NextGen is a multifaceted system requiring the functional
integration of many different subprograms and developments, which will
require significant investment over many years. For a project of this
complexity and scope, it is critical that overall planning and
execution responsibility be centralized. The current structure, which
spreads the decision-making for program requirements, timing and
investment priorities across numerous organizations, has resulted in
inefficiencies, confusion, and delays that we simply can no longer
afford.
We need a single NextGen Implementation Office with strong
leadership, directly responsible and accountable for the successful
deployment of the NextGen Air Transportation System. This Office must:
turn the JPDO's Integrated Plan into a detailed
Implementation Plan;
establish the year-over-year investment required;
be provided with the resources necessary to get the job
done;
directly manage the FAA's NextGen programs;
identify clear and agreed-to metrics that track performance
to NextGen goals, and
be held accountable for achieving results.
It is especially important to ensure the primary metrics used to
measure NextGen results reflect air transportation system performance
and not implementation activity. For example:
Rather than measuring the number of new runways built, we
should be measuring the operations per hour on our existing
runways.
Rather than measuring the on-time arrival rate associated
with continually increasing ``block times'', we should be
measuring the average gate-to-gate times and fuel burned
between key city pairs.
Rather than measuring the numbers of procedures (e.g., RNP,
LPV) published by FAA, we should be measuring the number of
operations using these advanced procedures and the average
distance flown and fuel burned in key terminal areas.
As with the JPDO, it is expected that this office will reside
within FAA. However, it must have sufficient visibility to accomplish
its critical mission, including coordination of the important NextGen
contributions from partner agencies and industry and the alignment of
NextGen development and deployment with the international community.
Accelerate Deployment of Off-the-Shelf Capabilities to Improve Near-
Term Performance
At the same time that this office is being set up, we need to
accelerate the deployment of capabilities that are fully available
today and that we know will be an important part of the evolving
NextGen system. These capabilities include Automatic Dependent
Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B), Required Navigation Performance (RNP),
Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA), and the Ground-Based Augmentation
System (GBAS).
Automatic Dependent Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B) is the next-
generation surveillance technology that will augment and decrease
dependence on our aging and costly radar infrastructure. ADS-B uses
GPS-based aircraft position information, broadcast from aircraft via
data link to a ground network and other aircraft for use by controllers
and other pilots. The first step in ADS-B deployment is getting the
information from the aircraft to the ground--commonly referred to as
``ADS-B OUT''. Australia is using ADS-B for routine surveillance across
much of their airspace today. Over 60 percent of the international
flights operating to and from Australia are already equipped with the
ADS-B OUT capability and are benefiting from ADS-B surveillance
services in airspace covering over 50 percent of the Australian
continent. Australia's civil aviation regulator has also issued a rule
requiring ADS-B capability for all aircraft operating above 29,000 feet
by 2013. Similarly, Europe has published a proposed rule for all
aircraft to have ADS-B OUT capability by 2015. In addition, Canada is
actively deploying ADS-B today to control aircraft operating over
Hudson Bay.
The FAA is well on its way to deploying the nationwide
infrastructure needed to receive the ADS-B information and integrate it
with controller displays. A ground network and associated service is
expected to be fully deployed by 2013.
ADS-B avionics are well-defined by industry standards and available
for most aircraft today. However, there is very little incentive for
aircraft operators to equip their fleets now since the primary benefit
of ADS-B OUT is to the FAA in the form of reduced costs from
decommissioning a large number of the secondary surveillance radars.
Unfortunately, the FAA's proposed rule for airborne equipage will not
be fully effective until 2020, deferring FAA's cost savings.
Rather than wait until 2020 for FAA savings to kick in, the
requirement for ADS-B OUT capability in the U.S. should be accelerated
to at least align with Europe's 2015 requirement. Additionally, to
ensure that overall cost-benefit can be established, the FAA should be
provided with the funding needed to equip the necessary aircraft with
ADS-B OUT capability. This would greatly accelerate the benefits to the
FAA, while jumpstarting a key NextGen enabler. With a fully-deployed
ADS-B OUT capability, the business case for user investments in the
second step, ``ADS-B IN'' will be stronger and far easier to make. This
capability is the key to capacity and safety improvements needed in the
future.
Another technology that is ready for implementation now is Required
Navigation Performance (RNP). As discussed earlier, RNP provides the
ability to fly precise and repeatable paths, enabling shorter and more
effective arrival and departure procedures. For example, during a 12-
month period, more than 8,000 RNP approaches at Brisbane saved 34
Qantas 737-800s a total of 4,200 minutes of flying, 65,000 gallons of
fuel and 621 metric tons of CO2 emissions. Average delays at
the airport were reduced by 30 seconds for all arriving aircraft, which
benefit from the fact that the RNP 737-800s are shaving between 10 and
23 nautical miles off their approach path to the runway, compared with
an existing visual approach.\6\ Effective fuel-saving procedures are
essential to motivate aircraft operators to invest in these upgrades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Aviation Week and Space Technology, April 28, 2008, page 56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be clear, RNP technology exists and is being used today. In
Australia, there have been in excess of 31,000 RNP approaches and
departures flown to-date.\7\ We simply need to accelerate the
development of RNP procedures. While the FAA has been developing RNP
procedures for several years, they remain the exception rather than the
norm. One mechanism for acceleration is to enlist the support of third-
party procedure developers. There are already several qualified sources
for this service and they could be effectively employed to augment the
existing FAA resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Airservices Australia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continuous Descent Arrival (CDA) is another capability that can be
exploited more rapidly. Many aircraft are already equipped with the
basic systems needed to execute CDA procedures. With the significant
cost savings resulting from CDAs, other operators will be strongly
motivated to invest in upgrades if they could routinely use these
procedures. As described earlier, numerous trials, including SAS
(Sweden), UPS (Louisville, KY) and ASPIRE (Pacific Rim to Los Angeles/
San Francisco), have demonstrated the procedure's benefits. Routine use
of CDAs will require some modification to airspace structures, as well
as providing tools and training to air traffic controllers. The
solution is well-understood; the issue at hand is dedicating the
resources needed to put this capability to use in routine operations at
more airports across the U.S.
One final technology that should be accelerated is Ground-Based
Augmentation Systems (GBAS). FAA approval for the initial version of
the GBAS ground station is anticipated by May of this year. Ground
stations are already deployed in Sydney, Australia; Bremen, Germany;
Malaga, Spain; Guam; Seattle and Moses Lake, Washington; and Memphis,
Tennessee. Newark, New Jersey and Minneapolis, Minnesota are planning
ground station deployments in 2009. Boeing 737s and Airbus A380s are
already coming off the production line with the necessary avionics to
support GBAS. Boeing's 787 and 747-8 will be equipped for GBAS as well,
and plans are in place for upgrades to most production Boeing and
Airbus aircraft.
The FAA has been very supportive of this technology, and it is now
time to accelerate the installation of GBAS systems at our Nation's
largest airports. As with other NextGen technologies, a clear business
case for aircraft upgrades cannot be made without the availability of,
or at least a strong commitment to, the installation of GBAS ground
stations and supporting operational procedures.
Airspace Restructuring Around Airports is Essential
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that none of these NextGen
capabilities can be successfully deployed, nor the benefits fully
achieved, without restructuring the routes aircraft fly as they arrive
and depart from our Nation's airports. Using RNP, CDA, and GBAS, these
new routes are often more community-friendly, creating less noise and
emissions. For example, Figure 5 shows the flight paths for RNP (green)
and Non-RNP (red) aircraft approaching Brisbane runway 01 via the
``River'' noise abatement procedure.
Figure 5--Example of the RNP ``River'' approach to Brisbane runway
01--03/08
The RNP approach allows tracking at lower altitudes over non-
residential areas such as, in this case, the Brisbane River and
industrial areas. With RNP (green), the precision to stick to the river
and not ``creep'' over neighboring residential areas is quite clear.
While it is understandable that local communities have strong
interests in where these virtual ``off-ramps'' and ``on-ramps'' are
located, it also needs to be clearly understood that these changes are
needed to achieve the broader community benefits of overall reduced
noise and emissions. An example of this dynamic is the on-going effort
to reduce congestion in the New York terminal airspace. Four of our
Nation's most delay-prone airports are located within this airspace and
effects from these delays routinely ripple throughout the U.S. Efforts
to provide congestion relief via airspace redesign to take advantage of
new capabilities and procedures has been in work for over a decade,
delayed in part by opposition from local community groups. The support
and leadership of Congress is absolutely critical in developing the
community consensus needed to aggressively deploy NextGen capabilities.
We Must Accelerate NextGen Implementation
The NextGen Air Transportation System is needed to fuel our
economic growth, lower energy use, and protect our environment. We must
make it a national priority and provide the structure, leadership, and
resources needed to be successful. We need not wait for 2025 to see
results, and in fact, we must not. Improvements are needed today and
solutions are on the shelf waiting to be deployed.
We offer the following recommendations:
1. Establish and fund a fully responsible and accountable
NextGen Implementation Office in 2009.
2. Accelerate the requirement for ADS-B OUT capability to 2015
and provide the funding needed to satisfy the cost-benefit
analysis.
3. Install GBAS technology in the top 20 most congested U.S.
airports by 2011 and top 50 most congested airports by 2013.
4. Set and measure an RNP adoption target beginning in 2009
with a 20 percent year-over-year increase until 90 percent of
commercial flights are using RNP procedures, including
Continuous Descent Arrivals.
Our shared vision for NextGen is clear. The aviation industry now
looks to the Congress and FAA for the focused leadership required to
implement this much-needed advance in our transportation
infrastructure.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Kallenbach, thank you very much for
your testimony.
Well, Mr. Krakowski, the standards, the development of
standards, it seems to me, is essential for those that are
going to run the system, those that are going to use the
system. What can we expect, in terms of the development of
standards, in terms of time?
Mr. Krakowski. There clearly is a lot of standards work
going on, there has to be, in order to make sure that, when we
make this transition, that it's done safely, that it is
completely understood by everybody who's going to operate in
the system, as well as have the redundancy necessary to make
sure that it operates safely.
The RNP procedures that have been talked about already have
standards. A lot of the standards actually exist to run
operations today, as the panel described.
So, I think we're not really creating anything necessarily
new, in terms of operating standards; it's going to be more of
a refinement.
I'll give you a good example. We space aircraft farther
apart right now, because radars don't have the fidelity to
allow them to fly closer. ADS-B will give us that fidelity.
With ADS-B, we can have closer separation standards, and then
increase capacity and efficiency, as well.
So, if you want to have really far-reaching standards
changes that make a difference, this modernization effort,
particularly with ADS-B, is critical.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Wright, you were a controller for 32
years, how long will a modern jet--excuse me--how far will a
modern jet travel before the next sweep on the radar?
Mr. Wright. It's according to if it's a terminal, which is
6 seconds, or a en-route radar, which is 12 seconds. So,
basically you're looking at where it's at in the approach. If
it's on 240 knots, then it's going to go a lot faster than it
would if it's on approach, at 130 knots. So, it all depends on
the speed.
Senator Dorgan. So, because you don't see that airplane
constantly----
Mr. Wright. Right.
Senator Dorgan.--you see it intermittently, and because of
the speed, the result is, you need more spacing----
Mr. Wright. It's the update. Yes, that's why the en-route
environment uses 5 miles between and we use 3 miles in a
terminal. There's a PRM scope that uses a--it's a very quick
update that they use on runways that are not separated by a
mile or so, so it updates quicker. It's all about the update of
the radar.
Senator Dorgan. But, the--NextGen would change all of that,
because you know where that airplane is at every point.
Mr. Wright.With ADS-B, we get an update a second.
Senator Dorgan. Right.
Mr. Wright. So.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Krakowski, Mr. Wright's not very happy
with the FAA. He says you're not consulting with them, you're
not accessing information they have that could be helpful to
you. What's the story?
Mr. Krakowski. Yes, actually, relative to NextGen, I'd like
to just set a little bit of clarity around this. We have a
NextGen Management Board, which is the highest level of
leadership in the FAA, to oversee the NextGen rollouts,
particularly in implementation. NATCA has had a seat on that
board for 2 years now, and they're increasing their
participation. Last year, they participated at about 61
percent, this year at about 80 percent. And we welcome that.
And we particularly find Mr. Wright's input very, very
valuable.
The RTCA Task Force that was just commissioned, NATCA has
membership on those programs, as well.
Senator Dorgan. Yes, but this is--but, Mr. Wright's
criticism is more specific than that. He's talking about the
input that he thinks should have been required with respect to
that East Coast routing--I forget your description of it--but,
was not sought, and not welcome, apparently. Is there something
going on here that we don't understand? Because it doesn't make
sense to me that you wouldn't want everything everybody has to
offer to give you the best possible product.
Mr. Krakowski. Yes. I come from an environment, from the
airline industry, where we had really great cooperation, on a
technical level and a safety level, with all of the labor
unions. Clearly, the labor dispute, which has occurred some
years ago, has created a drag on the relationship, in our
ability to work together. We are looking forward to changing
that, particularly under the new Administration.
There are union contractual issues that define how that
relationship works, and we've got some work to do there.
Senator Dorgan. I understand. But, from my perspective, I
would hope everyone that you have the potential to work with
that can contribute in a positive way to this would say, ``I'll
tell you what, the FAA reaches out so much we're tired of
hearing from them.'' I mean, I just--I hope that you will make
an extra effort here so that we don't, in the future--I don't
know who was at fault here, but we don't, in the future, hear
anybody complain about their input not being sought. We should
seek everybody's input, discard that which is not valuable.
But, boy, we ought to reach out in every direction.
Mr. Kallenbach made a suggestion, a central office of
implementation. Dr. Dillingham, he makes the point that you've
got--you know, you've got a lot of different areas working
here, there ought to be some central office to coordinate
implementation. What do you think of that?
Dr. Dillingham. Mr. Chairman, we have made a similar point,
that there needs to be one central office with, in fact, the
way we suggested it was direct reporting to the Administrator.
This situation is really complicated, at this point in time,
because recently the ATO reorganized itself and positioned the
JPDO in a different place than we had suggested. Now, we're not
saying that that reorganization doesn't have some merit, but
that situation is further complicated by a recent executive
order that established yet still another organizational
framework, in terms of different roles and different
responsibilities.
We've said, at this point, that, you know, whatever
organization is put in place, clearly the place where the buck
stops is important, but more important than that is the outcome
of how--whatever the organization is, the focus ought to be
moving NextGen along.
Senator Dorgan. Senator DeMint will be back momentarily,
and let me call on the Chairman of the full Committee, and then
I'll go back and forth, by order of arrival.
Senator Rockefeller?
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I, like Chairman Dorgan, am very intense about this
subject, and I'm kind of tired of talking about it. Everything
that the President talks about--and that is, you know, carbon
release and wasted time and damage to the economy and
frustrated people and people not having reason to have
confidence in their government, et cetera--all comes together
in not having NextGen, NowGen, whatever you want to call it.
Now, some people are using the excuse that we don't have
the money for it. And I consider that to be way off the mark.
We have to do this, and we have to do it right away.
So, my question to you is, why are we so slow? I mean, I
can--you know, we've got labor-management disputes--I'm
actually also, like the Chairman, tired of those, because
everybody's got disputes and--I had people in my office
yesterday complaining about something which would probably
derail the FAA Reauthorization, and therefore any effort to do
NextGen. I think NextGen is absolutely priority number one.
So, is the lack of money, lack of focus, lack of
concentration, lack of anybody appointed, anybody serving in
the Federal Administration, appointed by this Administration--
are any of those things problems, or is there any possible
excuse for not doing this right away?
Any of you.
Mr. Kolshak. Senator Rockefeller, if I could address your
question.
From the airline's perspective, the issue we have is the
required implementation timetable is too long. So, when I look
at 2020 and 2025, and looking at capital, it's very hard for me
to go to the CFO of the company and ask for tens of millions of
dollars for equipage when it's not going to be required, and,
more importantly, the benefit--I will not gain the benefit for
another 10 or 15 years.
And the example that I would use is the old adage, ``Build
it and they will come.'' We've come, and they haven't built it.
We are retiring, by the end of this year, United Airlines, 100
aircraft that we've spent over $20 million on equipage that we
will not have fully utilized. And that's a difficulty that we
have without some type of a benefit that goes hand-in-hand with
the equipage and the expenditure.
The Chairman. Does anybody think that the Europeans--
they've got their SESAR system--that they're going to slow down
their progress because of economic difficulties? Does any one
of you believe that they're going to do that?
Voice. I don't.
Voice. No.
Mr. Krakowski. Senator, I just came back from Europe and
meeting with EuroControl in the European Union, and I can tell
you, in some aspects they're actually a little ahead of us, in
some aspects they're behind us, but the political will is
there. It's going to be interesting, because, with all the
different countries and sovereignties involved there, they have
a very complicated situation that has to come together. But, we
are working with them. It's important that we work with them,
because we don't want Joe's pilots to have different systems.
The Chairman. I'm not talking about working with them, I'm
just talking about their--nothing is going to stop them.
Mr. Krakowski. It doesn't appear.
The Chairman. And if they're behind us in a couple of
things, I didn't know about that. If they're ahead of us, I
certainly didn't know about that. The point is, they're not
going to stop, so we're going to fall farther and farther
behind unless we have the intensity and the political will to
make sure that there's money in the budget to do this. It would
be nice if we had somebody at the FAA who was actually in
office, would you not agree, Senator Nelson? Would that be
helpful?
And I'm just losing patience. We've got to find a way to
pay for this. It's not equally done. We have all kinds of
disputes, which just build upon--they become a part of culture.
How are we going to develop our culture of disagreement to a
finer art form this year so that we can not get something done?
I'm sick of it.
Dr. Dillingham. Chairman Rockefeller, if I could answer
your original question about, why is it taking so long? I mean,
as you well know, there was a history at the FAA of cost
overruns and schedule delays for the foundational systems or
legacy systems that we're talking about now. And the Congress,
you know, mandated the establishment of the ATO, which Mr.
Krakowski is, in fact, in charge of now. So, you know, that had
to be overcome.
And, at the same time, this is a very complex undertaking.
And so, add that to overcoming the history and the changes that
have been taking place, both organizationally and
technologically, it's a contributing factor.
But, we are now at a point where we are beyond planning. We
are now at a point where these are the kinds of things that can
be done now so that 5 years from now you can see a definite
impact on the system efficiency and capacity. What's going to
be important is, once this plan comes out from RTCA, that it
is, in fact, implemented and we don't get into that death
spiral again.
The Chairman. Yes. I'd just close, Mr. Chairman, by saying
we could make the decision, which lots of the Nation carries
out on, is not to give young children, 3 years and below,
something called EPSDT, which is early screening for various
diseases and things, and say, ``Well, we don't have enough
money to do that now.'' And, in fact, that was--that has been
the case. We paid, big-time, in the future.
You're saying, ``Well, I can't go to my board now.''
There's always an excuse. There's always a reason. The world
has changed. Everything has changed. And if we're going to get
this system built, somebody's going to have to step up and say,
``I'm going ahead.'' I think, on this Committee, we're prepared
to do that, but we'd like to be matched by some of the people
in the industry itself and at the FAA.
Mr. Wright. Chairman Rockefeller, I also serve on the board
of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers,
which is worldwide, and it appears to us that SESAR--they have
their funding more set, and they don't do what we call ``double
work'' like we do here in the States. We find certain
committees that I'm on, then we find another committee that's
doing the same work. And I believe the task force should take
care of that, but, in the past, there has been a lot of double
work going on.
The Chairman. OK. So, that's another excuse. And I'm just
saying I'm tired of excuses, and so is this Committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Brownback?
STATEMENT OF HON. SAM BROWNBACK,
U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS
Senator Brownback. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd ask consent that my opening statement be included in
the record.
Senator Dorgan. Without objection
[The prepared statement of Senator Brownback follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Brownback, U.S. Senator from Kansas
I want to thank all the witnesses today for your willingness to
come before our Committee to speak on one of most important issues
facing our Nation's transportation sector.
As you know, my home State of Kansas has been at the forefront of
aviation manufacturing for the past century--both in the commercial and
general aviation sectors. Keeping this in mind, I implore you to
continue engaging stakeholders from all sectors of the aviation
industry in your decisionmaking process. Your decisions will, without a
doubt, have major economic implications for thousands of my fellow
Kansans.
I believe, and I'm sure you'll agree, that the largest obstacle to
a seamless implementation of NextGen technology is current economic
constraints. The two main questions being: how much will all of this
cost, and who is going to pay for it? I believe that while it's
imperative for us to continue moving toward modernization, we do so in
a way that will not impose unfair costs on specific sectors of the
aviation industry, or even worse, the taxpayer.
Again, thank you all for your work on this issue and willingness to
testify today. I look forward to hearing your statements.
Senator Brownback. Gentlemen, thank you very much for being
here. I appreciate, particularly, the Chairman for holding this
hearing. This is one of these things that have been bouncing
around for a long period of time, as all of us are very
familiar with. It was bouncing around when I was first on the
Commerce Committee, went off, and now I'm back, and now it's
still bouncing around. So, I have some familiarity with it.
I am curious on what you're saying here on the FAA's
projection, that you handle, currently, about 50,000 flights
every day, and you're projecting, 2025, at somewhere between
double to triple that number of flights. What percent of that
do you feel like you can get if you have efficiently
implemented NextGen operation, versus how much just new
physical air, landing strips, and places are you going to have
to handle that? Have you broken that down?
Mr. Krakowski. A lot of those numbers were made some years
ago in the early planning phases. The devil in the detail is
how it's distributed. And that's an important issue. We are
virtually delay-free when there's good weather in this country,
with the exception of the New York area. If there's bad
weather, of course, delays occur because of that. If the system
evolves, where the traffic comes back or increases at those
levels in really hot-pocketed areas, and we haven't built the
runways, and we haven't done all the NextGen work necessary,
the delays are going to be hard to handle.
Senator Brownback. Well, what percent of those delays can
you handle by NextGen? I mean, if a fully implemented system--
I'm just curious, how much more can you increase the capacity
with NextGen?
Mr. Krakowski. So, this will determine, on separation
standards, as I was talking about earlier, where we can
actually bring airplanes closer together. If we can build new
runways--and we have, you know, built 14 of them in the last
few years--that's going to be a really big help to the system,
as well.
Senator Brownback. Do you know the breakdown on the number?
Mr. Krakowski. I can give it to your Committee, sir. We'll
get it to you.
Senator Brownback. OK.
Dr. Dillingham, you've worked on the physical
infrastructure issues. Have you looked at the runway issues,
too, along with the radar systems, or not?
Dr. Dillingham. Yes, Senator. The latest information that
we have comes from the FAA and indicates that, with full
implementation of NextGen and the runways that are planned now,
that somewhere around 60 percent of the capacity will be
handled. So, you will still have, you know, potentially
significant delays.
One of the things that is very important is the need to
build additional runways, and to start that process now,
because----
Senator Brownback. Regardless of NextGen----
Dr. Dillingham. Regardless of NextGen, regardless of the
14--the runways that are currently planned, there still needs
to be more development. And the issue, of course, is--in a
worst-case scenario, you could have a Boston, where it took 40
years to build a runway, or, in a best-case scenario, it's like
10 to 12 years. So, these are the kinds of things that need to
be dealt with now; otherwise--you know, NextGen is not a silver
bullet.
Senator Brownback. It just--the reason I ask that is, the
general aviation industries headquartered in my State's
fabulous, global dominating industry, one that has been hurt
some by Congress lately, in making fun of business jets. You
know, we look at it as, this is a business efficiency issue,
and we sell a number of jets, haven't been selling very many of
those lately; we'd love to sell a few more. But, the point of
it is, too, if you can't get into a place, it doesn't matter.
You're still selling a savings of time and efficiency, and if
you can't' get into someplace, if you don't have the airport,
if you don't have the system to be able to move people into it,
if you can't get into high-concentration markets, you've hurt
yourself. Or if you can't get out and back, because often it's
going from a high-concentration market into a low-
concentration, then back, same day. And you really need to
focus on getting both of those. And that's something I would
hope that we could do in this committee, is focus on what we're
doing to make sure we keep that system--the total capacity, the
physical capacity, the spacing and the NextGen moving together,
because we're looking, I think, at a real crunch, whenever the
economy picks back up, and these new, lighter-weight aircraft,
moving forward, if we really don't focus on this, you're going
to have a huge amount of delays in a lot of places. And I think
we can just see that coming if we don't get it done.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Kallenbach. If I could add one thing. When you talk
about new runways, part of this is making use of the existing
runways that we have that become impaired by weather. So, for
instance, to Senator Lautenberg's early remarks, Newark
actually has a runway that can become impaired by weather. And
so, it's like losing a runway. One of the things that NextGen
and ground-based augmented GPS can do for you is allow you to
use that runway during poor weather and, in effect, giving you
an additional runway without having to build infrastructure.
That's one of the concepts and one of the reasons we want to
move forward on some of these technologies.
Senator Brownback. Well--and I'm--I am all supportive of
that. Absolutely. I just say it's not--it's not going to be
enough, still, at the end, with the projections of what we're
looking at. And so, you've still got to move forward.
Mr. Kallenbach. Yes, sir.
Senator Brownback. And we need this. We need NextGen. We
need to do it now.
Thanks, Chairman.
Senator Dorgan. Senator DeMint?
Senator DeMint. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for
having to step out for a minute, so if I missed something, let
me know.
I share a concern of the Chairman when I heard what Mr.
Wright said, and compared to Mr. Krakowski, that the working
relationship might not be what we want, and I would hope, in
the future, that the Committee and all of you involved with the
technology and the management could continue along the way that
Mr. Krakowski talked about, this continuous improvement model,
where we're constantly upgrading.
And that's really the core of my question. I know we are
moving from one technology to what you referred to as NextGen,
and I'd like to hear you talk a little bit about what the
technical components of that are. But, I'm interested in how we
can move from where we are in a continuous quality-improvement-
type approach, substituting the new technology for the old and
continuing to have improving efficiency while we do that, and,
at the same time, make sure we don't tie ourselves into a
technology that is antiquated, that we're flexible enough and
that the way we build this system is that it can continuously
improve, which has not--at least in the past, been how
government operated. We've heavily invested in one system, and
that system stayed the same way for years, and we were so built
into it, we could not come in and add improvements.
So I'll start with you, Mr. Krakowski. How do you see us
integrating NextGen and still operate the old system and bring
both along and, at one point, jump off to new technologies?
Mr. Krakowski. Yes. Thank you, sir.
This is why we have to be very, very careful. What we are
proposing to do with NextGen is going to be tricky. This is the
first major overhaul of air traffic since the 1950s, 1960s. The
actual gear on the airplanes, how controllers work airplanes,
how pilots use the system, is going to change fundamentally,
and we're going to be living in a period of time where you're
going to have mixed equipage, mixed capabilities. You can't
just turn it on with a lightswitch. So, we have to evolve it
across the system----
Senator DeMint. Right.
Mr. Krakowski.--in a organized fashion, which is one of the
reasons the RTCA Working Group's important, because we went out
to industry and we asked the question, Where are your pain
points? Where are you willing to invest in equipage? Where are
you willing to change policies, standards, work with us, to
start rolling it out across the country in an organized
fashion? So, the work ahead over the next few months is going
to be very directive to where we put those resources. And I
think that's the right way--in order to keep the system safe,
we have to do it that way.
Senator DeMint. Mr. Wright, what would be your comments?
Mr. Wright. Well, my--I brought this little book with me
that we did years ago, and it shows the modernization projects
that the union worked with the FAA on. And my goal would be to
get back to where I can do another book that's more than 2
pages long, to where we can sit down at the front end. The
RTCA, we do participate in that. We are--we paid money to join
RTCA, to be able to participate. What we'd like to return to is
a--more of when a project is being designed, that a front-line
controller is included in that design. We feel that'll cut down
the troubles during implementation. We'd like to return to
that.
Senator DeMint. Yes.
Mr. Wright. We feel that would be smoother, save more
money, and it would take less time to get it implemented.
Senator DeMint. And I'll go back to you, Mr. Krakowski. Is
the union wedded to the old technology, or are they dragging
their feet moving to the new technology? What's the conflict,
here?
Mr. Krakowski. Yes, I would like to put a little clarity
around one issue, though. We have had controllers who have
worked traffic involved in every one of our modernization
projects. Now, there's a nuance. They may not necessarily be
representing the NATCA--the controller union's institutional
point of view. But, we stress test in our labs, with working
controllers, all these new technologies, like ERAM, that we put
out.
So, I think the difference is, for clarity, we do have
controller involvement of people working traffic in all of
these efforts. It is unfortunate, and I agree with Mr. Wright,
we need to get the union formally back into a better process
than we have now. I think that would be healthy for everybody.
But, we have had controller involvement.
Senator DeMint. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wright. Could I follow up, please?
Senator DeMint. Sure.
Mr. Wright. The only problem with the controller
involvement is when it's a person that's selected, they go into
these projects, they don't understand the project, they're--you
know, we had trouble last year with the inspectors being
``yes'' people, and that's what we kind of feel like--if we
have a union person there, we'd give them the authority to sign
off on things and they represent the whole bargaining unit, not
just themselves.
Senator DeMint. Good.
Mr. Wright. Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Well, we're going to hold a hearing with
respect to the air traffic controller issues, but let me just
say that this stuff has to stop. I mean, you all work for the
same team, paid by the same taxpayers. And Chairman Rockefeller
indicated that, you know, he's tired of delay and so on. All of
us are tired of delay, and we're tired of some of the battles
that go on. This stuff really has to be put to an end and----
Mr. Wright. I agree.
Senator Dorgan.--and we'll have a hearing, and we'll
explore those issues. But, at the end of that, my hope is that
Senator DeMint and I see air traffic controllers and the FAA
working hand-in-glove, working together as a team to produce
the very best product that can be produced and can move us into
the future as quickly as is possible.
So, I appreciate, Senator DeMint, your questions.
Senator Begich?
Senator Begich. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your
comments.
It is my first Committee, and I have to be frank with you,
I'm tired already of the back-and-forth. You know, I--as a
mayor for 5 and a half years, you know, we dealt with
management issues, we dealt with labor issues, and it's clear
to me there's just a full lack of communication between the
organizations. I mean, you believe one thing, you believe one
thing. I want to just echo the Chairman's comments that we
just--you've got to get beyond whatever the old battles are.
You know, there's a new Administration, there's going to be a
new contract, more than likely. There'll be more stabilization
over in the FAA to get things done. But, I just--I want to add
that just to the record.
But, I have a question. Mr. Dillingham, I don't know if you
can answer this, but, you know, I liked what Mr. Kallenbach
said here. You know, he had some very simplistic ways to kind
of move forward. And it seems like, as I went through your
report--and correct me if I'm wrong, but the JPDO was
statutorily set up to kind of set the vision, set the plan, set
the activity in action. It's really now time for a project
manager, people who actually know how to implement things,
because, at least my way of looking at life as a--again a mayor
that just happens to be a Senator, is how I describe myself--we
have a lot of visionaries, but then you've got to get people to
actually turn the dial and make it happen. Is that what's
missing here, or are we trying to move what we--when I say
``we,'' statutorily that's been set up, kind of moving it
around to fit the box, versus let's just clean out the box and
say, ``Now it's time to move to the next stage?''
Dr. Dillingham. I think you're right, Senator. There is a
consensus--if not a consensus, there are certainly several
important stakeholders that are suggesting just the remedy that
you have just talked about, is a program office, someone that
is in charge--totally in charge of NextGen. Again, now, ATO has
made that organizational change, and they have established a
senior vice president for NextGen. It's just not clear that how
this is all going to work has been communicated to the
stakeholders. I think there is a communications problem here,
as well.
And I want to say, again, you know, various kinds of
organizational structures may work; it is--you know, it's the
end product that's important. And at this point, we are now
turning the corner to implementation. You're right, the
planning, at this stage, is, in fact, over, and now they're
going to have to start planning for the next NextGen, because
this is never going to stop. I mean----
Senator Begich. Right.
Dr. Dillingham.--there's going to be another revision. And
that speaks to Senator DeMint's issue about, you know, How do
we not end up with antiquated technology, and so forth? And
that's a part of making that vision an integral part of the
current situation, as well.
But, the short answer is yes.
Senator Begich. And----
Mr. Krakowski. Senator, if I may?
Senator Begich. Yes.
Mr. Krakowski. The establishment of the Senior Vice
President position for NextGen--and Vicki Cox is sitting behind
me--she's accountable for all things NextGen at the FAA. One of
the reasons we did this is the 14 runways that we've built
since 2001, for the most part, came under budget, on time. The
rigor of work and the organization, particularly with the new
Director of Implementation and Integration that works for
Vicki, is going to use a process that has served us well.
That's why we have confidence in it.
Senator Begich. OK. When you say ``served us well,'' what
do you mean by that?
Mr. Krakowski. Well, we opened three runways in November,
on time and under budget, or at budget, and the FAA's not had a
great history of doing that. We're off the GAO high-risk list,
because we've cleaned up our act. The processes that worked
under Ms. Cox and her organization helped get us here. So, I
actually think we're in a better place.
Senator Begich. Do you need the JPDO anymore?
Mr. Krakowski. Absolutely. The JPDO does a number of
important things for us. They created the long-term vision,
they created the interagency discussions across a broad
spectrum of stakeholders, and they're also kind of our long-
range radar. When they see technologies changing, if they see
something way off in the distance that might suggest, ``Hey,
maybe we shouldn't make this investment or go in this direction
exactly the way it's planned,'' we're going to need them in
there, as well.
Senator Begich. And if I can jump back to one quick thing.
Mr. Wright made the comment about the right person to be on
those committees, from his organization. Do you select them, or
does the union select them?
Mr. Krakowski. The union typically selects them. Now, if we
offer up or the union is sponsored into it through agreement,
it's the union's choice.
Senator Begich. But, you don't have any objection if the
union says, ``Here's the person we want on any of the
committees that relate to NextGen,'' do you?
Mr. Krakowski. It's a place I've been to. Thirty years in
the airline industry, that was common practice, so----
Senator Begich. OK, so you don't have a problem with that.
Mr. Krakowski. No, sir.
Senator Begich. OK.
I'll end there, because my time's expired.
Mr. Kolshak. Senator, if I could just add one thing, is
that, you know, the project management concept is--from the
industry's view, we concur, it's very important. You know, if
this needs to be a national priority--when you look at the
importance of NextGen, you look at the amount of spend that
people have projected, it is too important to be tasked to
several organizations within the FAA. No disrespect meant to
Mr. Krakowski. We in the industry feel that it should be
treated similar to how the national interstate highway was
treated when Eisenhower embarked upon it, is--he appointed an
administrator to oversee and adopt the National Interstate
Highway System. And we concur with Mr. Kallenbach's view of it.
Senator Begich. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do
agree, I mean, I've--if I can just say one quick comment, Mr.
Chairman, and that is, I know when I did a major project--I
love my architects, they have great design, great thought, but
once the projects started, they were there off to the side,
they did not help implement the program, because I would have
ended up three times the cost, because they have great dreams,
but I have to be practical about implementation.
Thank you.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Nelson?
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It's my understanding, in December, that the FAA started
installing Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcasts, ADS-B,
in South Florida. Would you share that with the Committee?
Mr. Krakowski. Absolutely. ADS-B is the primary moving
force for NextGen which gives us the capacity increases and the
efficiency and the safety we're expecting. We chose Florida as
a test bed because of the wide variety of traffic and weather
that occurs there. A lot of light airplane traffic, high-
intensity military operations, and, of course, a very robust
airline system, as well. We also have the Embry-Riddle
University, one of the premier aviation academies here in the
country. So, we think we've got the right kind of environment
to really start testing this system with equipped airplanes.
A key part of the work in 2009 is going to be the human-in-
the-loop testing. How do pilots work with this system? How do
controllers work with this system? How far do you take
automation? What do you do with it? And we're very pleased to
be doing this in Florida.
Senator Nelson. So, what do you do, install some of the
heads-up equipment in the cockpit and, in South Florida, you're
broadcasting off of the satellites instead of through your
normal communication? Is that what's--what you're going to do?
Mr. Krakowski. The way it works is that the GPS receiver on
the airplane picks up its position from satellites, but then it
precisely transmits that position to the ground network that's
been established in Florida, which is the ADS-B system. And
that's what really creates the robustness of it.
Senator Nelson. So, there's no new equipment that you have
to put on the aircraft.
Mr. Krakowski. You do need ADS-B equipment, yes, in order
to do it. So, ADS-B is a technology attached to GPS to make
this all work so the ground stations can see the airplane
correctly. But, more importantly, and one of the really neat
things, as a pilot----
Senator Nelson. Is so the pilot can see.
Mr. Krakowski. And not only that, we can see other
airplanes, we can see----
Senator Nelson. Now, how do you----
Mr. Krakowski.--weather----
Senator Nelson.--test the system, since eventually
FutureGen is going to have all of that in all the cockpits so
that a pilot could have awareness of everything around him
right in his cockpit--how do you test that since it's only
going to be a few airplanes that have this?
Mr. Krakowski. Well, again, we have to lay this out and
roll it out carefully, because you are mixing a modern system
with an older system.
Now, what's really interesting is, some of the airlines are
already creating some capabilities with the electronic flight-
back, so they've got great capabilities, on the ground and in
the air, to see other airplanes, see weather. So, it's
incrementally going out there, but we also need to determine
what works and what doesn't work successfully. It's one of the
reasons we have Embry-Riddle involved with us, to make some of
those determinations.
Senator Nelson. OK. Now, I want to shift to a labor issue
in Florida. In Orlando, you split the functions between the
tower and the radar functions, but in Miami you kept them
together. Now, if you're testing ADS-B in Miami, where radar
and tower are together, but what you've done around the rest of
the country is split the functions, explain that.
Mr. Krakowski. Well, the splitting of the Orlando facility
solved a number of issues. And I remember the phone call with
you, sir, on this. We had some serious staffing problems at
that facility. It took the complication of having controllers
qualify in multiple positions and reduce that vulnerability.
So, that was the primary reason we did it down there.
But, looking forward, ultimately the current configuration
of TRACONs, radar rooms, control towers, and en-route centers
is going to change with NextGen. We don't need separate
TRACONs, and we don't need separate en-route centers. NextGen
provides the ability for us to combine all that. So one of the
key things about Florida is, we're going to have to figure out
and work to understand how that comes together. It's one of the
reasons we're doing the test there.
Senator Nelson. OK. So, you're saying that there's no
difference with regard to splitting it, or not splitting it,
with testing ADS-B.
Mr. Krakowski. No, we don't think there's an issue, sir.
Senator Nelson. OK. Now, tell me, has the experience factor
in Orlando gone down as a result of separating the two
functions in Orlando?
Mr. Krakowski. We don't believe the experience factor's
gone down. We actually think what it's done is, since you split
the specialties to radar and tower, it actually created a
better ability for people to become fully qualified in each of
the two sectors.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Wright, that's not what I hear from
labor.
Mr. Wright. No. Well, I worked in a--I worked in the
Atlanta tower and at the Charlotte tower, both worked radar and
tower. And what we feel is that you get a workforce certified
quicker if you only have to certify on the tower, but what you
lose is controller expertise and knowledge of the full
operation. And that's what concerns us, is the--used to, the
controllers worked tower and radar, they could help each other
out, they knew what was going the other function. You lose that
when you split it.
Senator Nelson. The Chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee
in the House of Representatives, Congressman Costello, has said
that when he visited the Orlando tower, that only one
controller out of ten had on-duty over-1-year experience. Now,
what do you say about that, Mr. Krakowski?
Mr. Krakowski. I'm not aware of that----
Senator Nelson. All right, would you check----
Mr. Krakowski. I would have to get----
Senator Nelson.--and get back to this----
Mr. Krakowski. Yes.
Senator Nelson.--Committee in a timely fashion for the
record?
Mr. Krakowski. Yes, I will----
Senator Nelson. And the record will remain open for that.
Senator Nelson. Senator Thune?
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate
today's Subcommittee hearing, because there is no question that
transforming our Nation's current air traffic control system is
absolutely critical if we are to improve safety and plan for
the anticipated growth in the amount of flights that our
Nation's air traffic control system's going to be handling into
the future.
However, to make NextGen a reality is going to take a
considerable amount of time and money, both from the Federal
Government and from the users of our Nation's air traffic
control system. And, while changing the current ground-based
systems for air traffic control to satellite-based systems
represents a host of new capabilities, the delays that we've
experienced in the past have raised a lot of questions from the
user community that have to be addressed for this
transformation to be effective.
And I guess my question--and I'd direct this to any of the
panelists, and I appreciate your insights today--is that,
seeing that the FAA has noted that two-thirds of its assets are
beyond their useful life, how much longer can we wait to fully
embrace NextGen technologies, both in terms of safety and
handling the air traffic volume that's expected to exist in the
future?
Mr. Krakowski. We agree that we need to get moving on this
quickly, because we do have old facilities. We're keeping them
put together--or, you know, we're keeping them operating
safely, but it does take more time, resources, and money to
keep doing that with the old facilities every year. So, the
NextGen effort, if we can accelerate, it's going to be very
helpful.
Senator Thune. How much time would you say we have, I mean,
in terms of just the safety issues and the volume issues that
we're dealing with?
Mr. Krakowski. Well, the volume issues have some relief
right now, because the industry's down. It will probably take a
few years for that to catch up, which is why this is really a
good time to try to get this moving quicker, so when the
traffic does come back, I have new facilities, some
groundbreaking on some new facilities, some modernization
efforts going in there. This is the worst time I can think of
to lay back and not spend the money.
Senator Thune. Anybody else care to comment?
Mr. Kolshak. If I could just add to Hank's point, is that
now is the time, is--one, as you mentioned, Senator, the
crumbling infrastructure, and two, with capacity being in a
lull right now, one of the highest costs that we have in the
airlines for equipage isn't the equipment itself, generally,
it's the out-of-service time, it's pulling aircraft down to
equip them. And now, just with the natural drop in demand, we
have more capacity that's pulled down that we could equip. And
the important thing is, is that this is real--we talk about
NextGen, and people's eyes roll back because they think of this
futuristic Star Wars--is that really there are some elements
that we can accelerate, available technology, today--in GPS, in
ADS-B transponders--that we could realistically equip our fleet
with in the next 2 to 3 to 4 years and start to derive benefit.
So, the timing is crucial, and we're certainly more than
willing to pay our way there, but we've got to see the benefit
of doing so.
Mr. Kallenbach. And I think that--if I may--on the
technology front especially, the comment was made earlier about
ADS-B and the equipage rates. One of the things that is very
easy to do is to accelerate the mandate of ADS-B from,
currently, 2020 in the U.S. to 2015, which also harmonizes us
with Europe. And that's still a reasonable time-frame to equip.
It's a time-frame that we can then realize the benefits across
the system, because everybody will be equipped.
And that's back to your point earlier, Senator, where you
need to have everybody in to get the benefits. And I think, in
some ways, we tend to look for the grand solution, but just the
acceleration of that mandate, just that piece, would accelerate
the equipage, which would then generate the demand for more
features, and we'd be well ahead, by at least 5 years, from
what the current timescale is. And that's an action, I think,
that we can take immediately and get going on it. And to line
up with the capital budgets of things like the airlines, 6
years is a very reasonable planning horizon; whereas, 12 years
gets way too far out.
Senator Thune. If we--so, from the Committee's standpoint
as we work to reauthorize the FAA bill this year, what is the
one improvement that you would like to see the FAA make
regarding its ongoing efforts on NextGen?
Mr. Kolshak. Well, first off, the controllers--the figures
you put out, and Senator Brownback said earlier, if you want us
to work two to three times traffic, we know we need the
equipment. We need to see progress toward that as we move
along, because as traffic increases, our system can't handle
it. You're asking the controllers to work more airplanes, and
we're already working as many planes as we can with the present
system. So, as we go into this year, we'd like to first see, as
the project gets more defined, where it's going, a direct path.
Like has been said by the Committee members, the controllers
run the advanced automation system from 15 years ago; it was
coming along, and then it just went away. And we want to
believe in the project, and we want to see a defined path next
year of the--of where it's going.
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all very much.
Senator Dorgan [presiding]. Senator Thune, thank you very
much.
Let me thank all the witnesses today. You have heard, from
the Chairman of the Committee and others, the passion about
trying to move on this. I said earlier, the issue is one of
price and pace. How do we decide to raise the funding for it
and meet the funding needs, even now, during more difficult
times? And how do we find ways to truncate the time that's
required to begin implementing this?
Mr. Krakowski made the point that, you know, you don't just
flick a switch in the morning and you've changed the entire
system. I understand that. I mean, we've had an aviation system
in this country that has developed over time. One point, many,
many years ago, nobody had a transponder. And then, you know,
everybody just sort of flew, looking out the window, and then
got transponders, and so, you can--you've got some controllers
up there taking a look at little dots on a screen; and, you
know, the development of general aviation, the development of
commercial aviation, and now the newer issue of, How do you
integrate into our airspace unmanned aerial vehicles? We're
doing that substantially in a war theater, in Afghanistan and
Iraq, with Predators and Global Hawks. But, having Homeland
Security fly Predators on our borders raises other issues of
integrating it into the airspace, which makes, I think, this
next-generation--or NextGen, NowGen, whatever you call it, so
much more important, and so much more urgent than it was, from
a time standpoint.
So, we have asked you to come and give us your perspective
from many different centers, and we appreciate that, and we'll
hold other hearings and try to move this forward.
I do want to make one final point. We--there's a lot about
the Congress that everybody's frustrated about, even those who
serve in this body. You know, we're over on the floor now on a
national service bill. We had to file cloture on the motion to
proceed to go to a bill. It's unbelievable to me. You know,
as--and then, after you get cloture, 30 hours post-cloture--I
mean, this is not a huge, controversial piece of legislation.
This Congress isn't working so well, and we need to find a way
to make it work better.
On issues like this, we can't, at the end of this Congress,
say, ``Well, we just missed it, we couldn't get this done, we
couldn't reach agreement.'' We need to move forward. If this
country's going to keep its lead in technology and science
and--particularly the new technologies--we need to be
determined to make that happen. So, this is one of those areas
of new technology and modernization and capability that this
Congress, Republicans and Democrats, working together, have to
dedicate themselves to achieve. To not achieve this and not
move forward on this would be inexcusable, in my judgment. So,
we're going to push very, very hard to make this happen.
Let me thank you again.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:18 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Gebhardt & Associates, LLP
Washington, DC, March 24, 2009
Hon. Byron L. Dorgan
Chairman,
Aviation Security, Safety, and Operations Subcommittee
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Dorgan:
As the FAA contemplates modernization of the air traffic control
system, we wish to call to the Aviation Subcommittee's attention the
cautionary tale of the FAA's 2005 privatization debacle, in which the
FAA undermined the effectiveness of the Air Traffic Control System by
contracting out Flight Service Controllers. The result has been a sharp
decline in essential services to general aviation pilots in need of
weather, navigation, and rescue services. The FAA also seriously harmed
a dedicated and experienced Federal employee workforce based on illegal
age discrimination.
Our law firm represents over 200 of the 1,900 former Federal Air
Traffic Controllers wrongfully fired by the Federal Aviation
Administration in 2005 because they were deemed an ``aging work
force.'' \1\ These Controllers not only lost their Federal employment
but also their ATC retirement benefits.\2\ We are urging you to support
restoration of lost ATC retirement credits to the Controllers and a set
aside of $100 million in the FAA budget to pay claims of age
discrimination in the case of Breen v. LaHood, C.A. 05-0654 (RWR)
(D.D.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The FAA terminated this aging workforce from Federal service in
the largest Reduction-in-Force (RIF) in U.S. Government history. Many
of the fired Controllers were within a few years of retirement when the
FAA contracted out their jobs to Lockheed Martin, which did not give
them any retirement credit. The FAA's RIF and contracting out to
Lockheed Martin eliminated the ATC retirements of nearly 2,000 long-
time government employees.
\2\ The Congress's previous attempt to address this issue in 2005,
the Snowe Amendment, P.L. No. 109-115 (S.Amdt. 2150 to H.R. 3058),
provided limited relief to almost 100 Controllers, but also set a
precedent for allowing Controllers to accrue Federal retirement
benefits while working at Lockheed Martin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our expert economic analysis, by the former Chair of the Economics
Department of Georgetown University, estimates that a judgment against
the FAA would total at least $85 million, and most likely more in light
of recent Controller layoffs by Lockheed Martin.
The fired FAA Controllers have been working closely with Congress
to fashion a bill to restore lost ATC retirement credits and provide
reemployment opportunities for the Controllers, much needed measures to
address the devastating loss of employment and retirement benefits by
the Controllers and one which we hope you will support.
We request that this letter be placed in the record and that you
take up this issue with your colleagues. Please feel free to contact me
if you need any further information.
Sincerely,
Joseph D. Gebhardt
cc: Randy Lueders
Frank Eastman
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV
to Hank Krakowski
Question 1. What specific modernization efforts is the FAA pursuing
over the next 5 years that will improve the ATC system and its
management?
Answer. FAA's near-term NextGen implementation efforts are targeted
across three broad areas: airfield development, air traffic operations,
and aircraft capabilities. Together, these efforts will increase
capacity and operational efficiency, enhance safety and improve our per
flight environmental performance. We are moving forward with a dual-
pronged approach: maximizing the use of available capabilities in
today's aircraft and ground infrastructure, while working aggressively
to develop and deploy new systems. We believe this approach allows both
government and industry to extract the greatest value from existing
investments, while moving the industry to gain exponential benefits in
the mid-term and beyond.
Looking forward for the next 5 years, the FAA has additional runway
and taxiway improvement projects planned at a number of airports,
including Dulles, Houston, Denver, Philadelphia, and Chicago. In
addition, the FAA is pursuing improvements that will allow improved
efficiency and capacity from existing runways. For example the FAA is
currently pursuing a near-term rule change that will allow us to safely
restore lost capacity and efficiency in inclement weather at airports
with operations to closely spaced parallel runways. This offers the
potential to improve poor weather operations at a number of airports
with reduced delays throughout the NAS.
The FAA continues to make progress with our transformational
programs--ADS-B, SWIM, Data Communications, NextGen Network Enable
Weather and the NAS Voice Switch--and significant upgrades are planned
over the next 5 years. These are the long-lead time acquisition
programs, so we won't realize benefits from these programs in the very
near term; but they are progressing on schedule through the acquisition
process. Of the five initially identified as transformational NextGen
programs, ADS-B is most mature; but all are projecting substantial
advances between now and 2013.
Question 2. What are the schedules and performance metrics that
will be used to track these problems?
Answer. High level schedules and metrics for NextGen programs for
FY09 can be found in the FAA's NextGen Implementation Plan. For
managing the specific details, the FAA uses disciplined portfolio and
program management processes to track the schedules and associated
metrics (i.e., costs, obligations, implementation progress,
performance, etc.) to ensure that NextGen implementation remains on
track. These tools are supported by a comprehensive NAS Enterprise
Architecture that provides the framework and technical strategy for the
integration and transition of NextGen capabilities. NextGen
capabilities are implemented by applying System Engineering discipline
to define requirements, align implementation schedules across programs
and minimize program risk.
Question 3. What is the demand for FAA to develop RNP/RNAV routes
over the next 3 to 10 years? How many total RNP/RNAV routes does the
industry need the FAA to develop at the top 35 airports? Does the FAA
have the resources and staff needed to meet this demand? If not, what
resources does the FAA need to accomplish meaningful implementation of
RNP/RNAV at the top 35 airports?
Answer. Based on forecast aircraft equipage, there is sufficient
Performance-Based Navigation (PBN)-equipped capability in the Part 121
airlines to use the expected growth in procedure development. The
equipage levels are already high enough for the future demand of RNAV.
For RNP procedures, equipped capability levels are at 60 percent
(approximately the minimum equipage needed for air traffic to run a
beneficial operation) and forecast to increase to close to 80 percent
by 2016. This also meets the demand for RNP procedures.
To fulfill the needs of industry, the FAA will have to develop a
minimum of 1,200 new PBN procedures during the next 10 years at the top
35 airports.
Forecast Equipped Capability at the Top 35 Airports
We are migrating away from site-by-site (or runway-by-runway)
procedure implementation process toward a NextGen readiness concept
that would include development of an integrated system of PBN routes
and procedures by geographic area (incorporating metro areas and
outlying airports). The key difference is that funding requests would
combine airspace, environmental, and procedure development. This
concept delivers optimum benefits for the air traffic and carrier
communities. Funding would run from $10-$15 million for each geographic
area and would include procedure development, airspace redesign, and
associated environmental assessments or studies.
Question 4. I understand the FAA contracted with ITT to begin the
installation and use of ADS-B ground installations in 2007. What has
been accomplished under this contract to date? Is the contract
currently on schedule and within budget? Are there any performance
problems with this contract?
Answer. To date, ITT, Corp. has met all outlined program
milestones. In just over a year after the contract was awarded, the FAA
made an In-Service Decision (ISD) on November 24, 2008 that
commissioned ADS-B essential services which improve situational
awareness--i.e., Traffic Information Service-Broadcast (TIS-B) and
Flight Information Service--Broadcast (FIS-B). Pilots flying in
equipped aircraft can see live traffic on displays; and receive free,
real-time graphical weather displays from the National Weather Service,
along with critical flight information, such as temporary flight
restrictions and special-use airspace.
Eleven ADS-B radio stations were installed at the following
locations: Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, Hardee, Okeechobee, Dade-
Collier Airport, Key West, St. Cloud, Sebastian Municipal Airport, Hobe
Sound, Boca Raton Airport, Homestead Dade Marina, and Florida Keys
Marathon Airport.
The ISD decision cleared the way for the vendor to install ground
stations and transmit broadcasts for operational use across the nation,
starting on the East and West Coasts and portions of the Midwest, with
340 ground stations scheduled to be operational by September 2010.
The FAA's ADS-B contract is on schedule and on budget. As with any
initial production, there are issues relating to radio station
performance with the system and adjustments will be made as required.
The program office is working closely with the vendor to make these
changes. Additionally, with all large scale programs there are risks.
Currently, the program office has identified risks in the deployment
and implementation of ADS-B, is monitoring them, and has planned
mitigations for each risk.
Question 5. In testimony before the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee last month, both the DOT Inspector General and
Dr. Dillingham testified that one stumbling block to wider scale
acquisition of NextGen equipment by the airlines is the FAA's failure
to specify technical requirements. For example, ``ADS-B In'' equipment
must be FAA-compatible. But the FAA has not yet finalized its
requirements for this equipment. Because of this, airlines have waited
before investing in this new technology. For which core NextGen
programs (ADS-B In and Out, DATACOM, etc.) does the FAA need to
finalize technical requirements for users, and when do you expect the
FAA to issue these standards?
Answer. The standards do need to be developed in order for equipage
to occur.
``ADS-B Out'' \1\ is well defined by the FAA with planned
operational use for air traffic separation services. The FAA plans to
mandate ``ADS-B Out'' by a rule in 2010 with compliance required by
2020. The aviation community--consisting of avionics manufacturers,
aircraft manufacturers, airlines, and the Department of Defense (DoD)--
commented and provided input on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) through the Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC). However, the
aviation community and FAA realize additional large scale benefits
reside in ``ADS-B In''.\2\ ``ADS-B Out'' provides immediate benefits in
non radar airspace and supplements the availability of air traffic
separation services in existing radar airspace. Additionally, ``ADS-B
Out'' is the enabling function for ``ADS-B In.'' The current activities
for publishing the Technical Standard Order (TSO) for ``ADS-B Out''
will be compatible to future ``ADS-B In'' applications. ``ADS-B In''
has multiple functions. The first function is the ability for aircraft
to receive traffic and weather information on a cockpit display within
a specific ADS-B service volume from the ground infrastructure.
Currently, this is being used operationally in the NAS and the FAA is
moving forward with confidence for nationwide deployment. Additional
information to the cockpit, including traffic, weather, and flight
information can be employed to accrue additional safety benefits
(reduction in fatal accident rate), increased efficiency of flight
(including fuel savings), and an increase in capacity of the NAS.
Inclusion of avionics into the cockpit also provides a notional
opportunity for industry to develop additional services, including
runway safety and incursion prevention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ADS-B Out is defined as the transmission of the aircraft
position into a unique digital code and combines it with other data
from the aircraft's flight-management system--the type of aircraft, its
speed, its flight number, and whether it is turning, climbing or
descending. The code containing all of this data is automatically
broadcast from the aircraft's transponders once a second.
\2\ ADS-B In is the ability for aircraft to receive traffic and
weather information on a cockpit display within a specific ADS-B
service volume and also the ability to do aircraft-to-aircraft
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A core set of high value aircraft-to-aircraft applications of
``ADS-B In'' are expected to be completed by FY 2010. As noted in the
ARC report published in September 2008, the ARC recommends that the
FAA, in partnership with industry, consider establishing a program for
``ADS-B In'' by 2012. The ARC further recommends that this program
defines how to proceed with ``ADS-B In'' beyond the voluntary equipage
concept in the current NPRM. Finally, the ARC recommends that the final
rule preamble be modified to include the intention to move toward and
encourage ``ADS-B In'' in the future. The ARC report recommendation
emphasizes their understanding that ADS-B ``in'' has high value
benefits.
As stated in the 2009 NextGen Implementation plan, Datacom
requirements should be completed in 2014 and Paired Guidance Approaches
have requirements planned to be complete in 2015.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Hank Krakowski
Question 1. As you answered my question regarding the FAA's
decision to split the radar and tower functions at Orlando (MCO), you
indicated that air traffic control modernization will essentially mean
the end of terminal radar approach control and en route centers. Could
you elaborate on the implications this would have on staffing and
experience levels?
Answer. The FAA expects that new technologies will result in a more
automated system that will, over time, change the role of controllers.
The phase-in of these new technologies and the phase-out of older
technologies is a long-term gradual process currently under
development. The FAA is still determining how the changes in technology
will change the controller workload.
Determining air traffic controller staffing is a dynamic function
based on traffic volume, operational complexity, future FAA forecasts,
hours of operations, controller retirements and other attrition losses.
As the FAA moves toward general service delivery facilities, it is
envisioned that future air traffic controllers will be trained in areas
of specialization ranging from basic and minimally complex entry level
positions to more complicated and demanding areas of specialization
matched to the correct experience level.
As we move closer to finalizing the design and implementation of
the general service delivery facilities, we will be in a better
position to anticipate staffing/experience levels. We will continue to
provide Congress with our annual updates and staffing projections
through our Controller Workforce Plan, FAA's 10-year strategy for the
Air Traffic Controller Workforce.
Question 2. We have spoken about the levels of experience at the
Orlando International Airport since the recent split of TRACON and
radar functions. Have you investigated the severe dip that has
reportedly occurred as a result?
Answer. The split did not result in a severe decline in experience
levels. Prior to the split, 47 percent of controllers had more than 5
years of experience. Today, 41 percent of controllers in the tower and
59 percent of TRACON controllers have more than 5 years of experience
respectively.
Question 3. It is clear that we are at a crossroads; we are looking
forward to a total reevaluation of how our Nation's airspace works and
how new technologies will affect our airspace users, and we are trying
to find the best ways to implement NextGen quickly and to pay for it
efficiently--yet we cannot abandon the safe upkeep of our current
system until we know the next one works. In light of this, why are we
going ahead with realigning facilities and services like radar and
tower functions? Shouldn't we postpone further realignments until
Congress can enact a comprehensive review and evaluation process?
Answer. The decision to realign facilities is based on operational
needs. As technological advances have allowed greater radar coverage
and multiple radar inputs, opportunities for increased services,
efficiency, and cost savings necessitate our ongoing examination of
alternative operational arrangements.
Realigning radar and tower functions does not impact the quality or
the amount of training controllers receive in each environment, and it
increases proficiency by reducing the number of positions that
controllers are required to learn. The effects to the operation are
virtually seamless.
Facility realignments enhance the safety and security for our
customers, since controllers are more focused and more familiar with
the areas under their control. The FAA has successfully realigned some
of the busiest facilities in the country including Las Vegas, Nevada;
Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Dallas, Texas; and Minneapolis,
Minnesota.
The FAA supports a review and evaluation process that is
transparent and reasonable and we look forward to working with the
Congress to develop the process. However, we must continue to move
forward to address our operational needs. As the FAA implements
NextGen, we will continue to analyze each of our facilities to make the
best decisions for safety, operations, and employees.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Warner to
Hank Krakowski
Question 1. Given the technological advances that come with a GPS-
based air traffic control system, the NextGen system could allow for
safer flights and increased traffic into National Airport. As you
testified at the March 25th hearing, the FAA and airlines will be able
to route flights more precisely and efficiently, resulting in reduced
flight times, delays and congestion at airports. Do you believe
implementation of the NextGen system offers the ability to safely
restore general aviation at National Airport?
Answer. One of the outcomes of the NextGen system is heightened
situational awareness and enhanced air surveillance tools for air
navigation services. However, the Department of Defense and Department
of Homeland Security determine the security and response time
requirements necessary to protect the National Capital Region (which
includes Ronald Reagan National Airport).
Question 2. The current air traffic control system forces European
flights into the Washington, DC area to follow an indirect flight
pattern toward the west in order to reach an air traffic control point
before landing. This situation creates inefficiencies in terms of
flight times and fuel usage. Keeping community interests in mind, can
the NextGen system facilitate a more direct and efficient eastern
approach to the Washington, DC area airports?
Answer. As the FAA considers future airspace redesign in the
Washington, D.C. area, it will review all stakeholder requests for
improvements. However, these requests must also be reviewed in light of
security issues in the National Capital Region airspace. Security in
the airspace is governed by the Departments of Defense and Homeland
Security.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
Hank Krakowski
Question 1. What incentives for accelerated early aircraft avionics
equipage is the FAA pursuing?
Answer. The FAA has been working with Industry through the ADS-B
Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to accelerate early equipage of
ADS-B. Specifically, two of the ARC recommendations focus on benefits/
equipage:
Recommendation #9: Leverage the benefits of ADS-B
information to incentivize equipage by establishing agreements
with specific operators.
Recommendation #10: Continue to establish agreements with
local and state governments to leverage the benefits of ADS-B.
Since receiving these recommendations, the FAA met with multiple
operators to determine potential incentive mechanisms to include in
potential agreements. Most recently the agency has signed approximately
four agreements with entities to accelerate equipage and NextGen. Below
is the list of the agreements and their objectives:
1. Honeywell was awarded approximately $3 million to develop
requirements, standards and human factors analysis in relation
to surface applications.
2. ACSS was awarded approximately $6 million and partnered with
U.S. Airways to create standards, flight demonstrations and
prototypes in relation to surface applications.
3. The agency signed a separate agreement with U.S. Airways and
ACSS to develop a plan to accelerate NextGen capabilities.
4. An agreement was signed between the FAA and NetJets to
develop a plan to accelerate NextGen capabilities.
5. The most recent agreement was signed with United Airlines to
work together on advancing the concept of In-Trail Procedures
(ITP) using ADS-B capable avionics.
Additionally, the program office is reviewing potential agreements
with the various states (California, Wisconsin and Minnesota) to
provide ADS-B services where currently they are not receiving any
services.
Question 2. What is the FAA doing to accelerate the deployment of
RNAV and RNP procedures?
Answer. With a solid foundation of routes and procedures in place,
we are exploring ways to accelerate Performance-Based Navigation (PBN)
and Next Generation Air Traffic System (NextGen). We are migrating away
from a site-by-site (or runway-by-runway) procedure implementation
process toward a NextGen readiness concept that would include
development of an integrated system of PBN routes and procedures by
geographic area (incorporating metro areas and outlying airports). The
key difference is that funding requests would combine airspace,
environmental, and procedure development. This concept of integrated
design and implementation makes sense and may help to reduce the
departure delays that continue to impact the public and industry. This
concept delivers optimum benefits for the air traffic and carrier
communities.
This concept provides integrated RNAV and RNP procedure design,
coupled with airspace and environmental changes, ensuring optimal
configuration of operations between airports. These changes will result
in increased predictability and increased efficiency, capacity,
throughput, and safety in terminal radar approach control operations.
Question 3. An important component of the transition to NextGen is
having enough qualified engineers to implement and install the
technology as well as oversee facility upgrades and maintenance. How
will the proposed Engineering Services Efficiency Plan (ESEP) impact
the FAA's readiness to implement NextGen?
Answer. The Engineering Services Efficiencies Plan is specifically
designed to position the engineering organization to enhance its
ability to support future requirements. NextGen is an increasing
component of this expected workload. The implementation of ESEP will
allow an increase in our field workforce to improve our ability to
manage facility upgrades that will be needed for NextGen in conjunction
with our ongoing modernization and sustainment of the existing NAS. In
addition, the plan also includes a strategy for centralized design
engineering that will enhance our efficiency and capability in this
area, enabling us to leverage our existing resources to better meet the
challenges of the future. This is standard industry practice.
We are also developing an enhanced training program for incoming
engineers to improve our ability to meet increasing needs.
Question 4. What are the FAA's plans for implementing ADS-B in the
non-radar areas of the lower 48?
Answer. Remote locations and hostile terrain environments can make
it cost prohibitive or even physically impossible to install and
maintain a radar site. ADS-B services could be provided at a lower cost
and could provide Air Traffic Control (ATC) the ability to use radar-
like separation and services to ADS-B equipped aircraft. This will
result in a higher IFR arrival acceptance rate, a reduction in
departure delays, and increase overall safety. In order to realize the
full benefits of increased surveillance capabilities, additional
equipment such as communications and automated weather stations may be
needed.
The largest area of non-radar airspace that the FAA plans to
implement ADS-B is the Gulf of Mexico. This area sees almost as much
daily traffic as the busy East-Coast corridor. In addition to
commercial carriers flying between the United States and Mexico, there
are 5,000 to 9,000 daily helicopter operations to oil rigs. An
agreement signed in 2005 between the FAA, Helicopter Association
International, oil-platform operators, and helicopter owners is
enabling the agency to install ADS-B ground stations on oil platforms,
with installation and maintenance transportation provided by helicopter
owners. The helicopter owners and operators are voluntarily equipping
early with ADS-B-capable avionics. In return, the FAA will provide a
range of new services where radar coverage has never been possible.
In addition to the Gulf of Mexico, the FAA plans to provide ADS-B
services wherever radar coverage exists today by 2013. Recognizing
there may be coverage gaps in certain areas, the FAA, in cooperation
with state and local governments, will review these gaps and determine
if there are additional areas that may be cost effective to supplement
ADS-B coverage. In addition, the FAA plans to work with the Department
of Defense (DoD) to explore using ADS-B in Special Use Airspace (SUA).
Question 5. Will the FAA reaffirm its commitment to working with
the Alaskan aviation community to accelerate the deployment of ADS-B
technology and infrastructure to more fully realize the safety benefits
of the Capstone Program?
Answer. The Capstone Project ran from 1999--2007 in Alaska and it
demonstrated a 47 percent reduction in aircraft accidents for ADS-B
equipped aircraft operating within the Yukon-Kuskokwim (Y-K) Delta
area. This was a factor in obtaining additional funding for the
deployment of Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS) throughout the
Nation. The FAA integrated the Alaska Capstone Program into the SBS
program in January 2007 to streamline the national ADS-B deployment and
accrue safety benefits more quickly in Alaska by accelerating ADS-B
deployment in the state.
Since that time, the FAA continued with deployment in Alaska and
added services in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Kotzebue, and Cantwell in
September 2008--a year ahead of schedule. The agency is continuing to
meet its commitment to deploy in the areas of Selawik, Point Hope,
Kivalina, Nome, Savoonga, Moses Point, and Shishmaref. Deployment in
these areas will be complete by the end of Fiscal Year 2009.
The FAA is fully committed to deploying ADS-B in Alaska and across
the Nation. The FAA's SBS Alaska office will maintain communications
with the Alaskan aviation community and state officials to address
Alaska's unique aviation challenges.
Question 6. What can be done this year to expedite the installation
of the ground-based infrastructure for the ADS-B component of this
important safety-enhancing system?
Answer. The ADS-B infrastructure deployments cannot be further
accelerated in FY2009. The deployment is aggressively proceeding as
planned within the scope defined in the baseline. All major program
milestones continue to be met. Furthermore, the FAA is utilizing
funding provided in FY2008 and FY2009 to expedite aircraft to aircraft
applications and 3 nautical mile separation in the en route
environment.
Question 7. What is the FAA doing to prepare for the incorporation
of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) into the NextGen system and the
Nation's airspace?
Answer. The integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) poses
technical, operational, and regulatory challenges that must be
addressed to meet increased demands by both Government and industry for
access to the National Airspace System (NAS). These challenges provide
unique opportunities to enable future technologies that may very well
play an important role in the Next Generation Air Traffic System
(NextGen). There are many ongoing supporting activities that focus on
immediate, near-term, and long-term objectives and goals. In general,
these activities include:
1. Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COA) and
Experimental Airworthiness Certificates to address current
needs;
2. Rulemaking activities to enable small UAS commercial
operations; and
3. Development of standards for ``sense and avoid'' and
``control and communications'' technologies to enable file-and-
fly capabilities in the longer term.
The FAA is responsible for ensuring UASs are safely integrated into
NAS air traffic control procedures, airport operations, and
infrastructure, and with existing commercial, military, and general
aviation users of the system. To enable immediate UAS access to the
NAS, the FAA reviews applications from Government agencies and private-
sector entities on a case-by-case basis. Federal, state, and local
government agencies apply for COAs, while private-sector entities apply
for Experimental Airworthiness Certificates. In either case, the
proposed UAS operation is reviewed and evaluated to ensure the operator
has acceptably mitigated all safety risks.
All users of the NAS, including UASs, must be capable of complying
with the general operating rules as stated in title 14 of the U.S. Code
of Federal Regulations. For full access to the NAS, UASs will need to
perform at a level equivalent to manned aircraft operations. Current
UASs are unable to comply fully with these requirements, due to
undeveloped enabling technologies in the areas of sense and avoid and
command and control. The FAA is leading the lengthy standards
development process under the auspices of RTCA Special Committee 203.
Development for these technologies will be a lengthy, time-consuming,
and resource-intensive effort. The need to harmonize these standards
both domestically and internationally makes this an even greater
challenge.
To address the shorter term industry needs, in early 2008, the FAA
established an Advisory Rulemaking Committee (ARC) comprised of members
from the UAS industry, aviation associations, and other Government
agencies. The ARC was tasked to develop final recommendations to
address commercial and private/recreational (remote control model)
operations in limited areas of the NAS. These recommendations were
submitted to the FAA on April 1 and are anticipated to provide the
framework for rulemaking efforts in support of small UAS operations.
These regulations will address requirements for certification and
operation of small UASs, operator qualifications, and UAS registration.
The final rule is expected to be issued in the 2010/2011 timeframe.
Question 8. Does the FAA support the creation of a single program
office to facilitate the implementation of NextGen?
Answer. A Senior Vice President was appointed to lead NextGen and
Operations Planning in the Air Traffic Organization in May, 2008, so
this objective has been accomplished.
Question 9. What steps can the FAA take to better communicate with
industry and other stakeholders to ensure that they fully understand
the content and objectives associated with implementing NextGen?
Answer. The FAA recognizes that it is imperative to communicate
effectively with the stakeholder community to keep it informed of
NextGen plans and progress. For example, the Air Traffic Control Assn.
which represents many members of the industry involved in air traffic
control, hosted a forum in September, 2008 to allow the FAA to hear a
broad range of industry views on critical NextGen implementation issues
and the community's needs for the NextGen Implementation plan. As a
result of this meeting, the FAA issued a new NextGen Implementation
plan this year that answers many of the key questions raised in the
ATCA forum. These include what NextGen will look like in 2018, what
NextGen will deliver in the mid term (2012-2018), what aircraft
avionics equipage needs will emerge through 2018 and what the FAA plans
to deploy in the near-term to make the best use of existing resources.
In a second initiative to communicate with stakeholders, the FAA has
launched the NextGen Implementation Task Force through the RTCA
industry forum to tackle the most significant issues surrounding
NextGen implementation including how to achieve the most benefits and
how to address business investment issues in the mid-term. The FAA
looks forward to receiving the Task Force's consensus recommendations
on ways to capture NextGen benefits as early as possible. The group's
final report is due to be complete in August, 2009.
Question 10. What can be done to eliminate confusion over avionics
equipment standards for the aviation industry?
Answer. The NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP) identifies a series
of initiatives involving avionics. These initiatives are in varying
stages of development, with some already in implementation and others
in the initial research and development stages. The FAA recognizes the
need to clearly identify the avionics equipment standards for each
initiative within NextGen, and has provided a high-level overview of
standards in appendix A of the NGIP. The majority of avionics standards
are developed by industry through the Federal Advisory Committee of the
Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RICA, Inc.)
In the case of transmission of ADS-B data (ADS-B Out), the FAA
published a notice of proposed rulemaking in 2008 that will eliminate
confusion over the ADS-B transmission standards. We plan to publish the
final rule in April 2010.
For reception and use of ADS-B data (ADS-B In), we will publish the
standards for situation awareness displays by the end of 2009. The FAA
is investigating strategies to accelerate the schedule for more
advanced applications, currently scheduled to be completed in 2012.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Ensign to
Hank Krakowski
Question 1. I believe that moving from a ground-based national
airspace system (NAS) to one based on satellite technology is a
critical development for aviation. Redundancy within the NAS is crucial
to maintain a consistent and high level of safety and to avoid
unnecessary delays. Compared to ground facilities, however, satellites
are much harder to service, repair, or replace. What steps is FAA
taking to ensure sufficient redundancy within a GPS-based NextGen
environment? What is the vulnerability of such a system to space events
like solar flares that currently disrupt other satellite activities?
Answer. Moving to a National Airspace System (NAS) based on
satellite technology provides a significant improvement in performance
for aviation, as well as new technical issues and vulnerabilities.
Satellite-based navigation relies on the global positioning system
(GPS) and the wide area augmentation system (WAAS) for vertically
guided approaches down as low as 200 feet above a runway. The GPS
constellation and the leased geostationary satellites used for WAAS are
redundant and highly reliable. Solar flares and ionosphere disturbances
do cause temporary outages of vertical guidance over short periods
during the 11 year solar cycle. The FAA plans to eliminate these
outages by including the new GPS L5 signal into WAAS in concert with
the GPS modernization program, underway by the United States Air Force.
The FAA also plans to retain a portion of the ground based navigation
and surveillance systems to provide a backup for area navigation and
surveillance to avoid unnecessary delays or disruptions to the air
traffic system. Radar will be used as an initial backup. As articulated
in the January 2007 Surveillance/Positioning Backup Strategy
Alternatives Analysis Final Report, the FAA will reassess the ADS-B
backup strategy prior to making an investment decision for radar
replacements beyond 2020. This may provide a differing approach based
upon the additional operational experience gained with ADS-B and
emerging technologies that are deployed, such as Galileo, the satellite
navigation system, and GPS-3, which could support an alternate backup.
Question 2. As the FAA repairs and maintains its outdated
infrastructure, is the FAA taking steps to ensure that existing
facilities can easily and efficiently be reconfigured in the future for
NextGen technology? If so, what are those steps?
Answer. The FAA is working to address future NextGen facilities
capabilities on a number of fronts. Current facilities will be upgraded
to accept NextGen capabilities as they are deployed in the near term.
In the meantime, the FAA is exploring future concepts for NextGen
facilities. In addition, by developing and implementing the NextGen
Voice Switch, facilities will have the flexibility to respond to
increased demand and continuity of service needs.
Question 3. Several years ago, NextGen was estimated to cost $40
billion--$20 billion for infrastructure and $20 billion for airlines.
Is there a more recent cost estimate?
Answer. A special JPDO/Industry team estimated the range from $15
to $22 billion for the development of NextGen. This range of figures is
just for capital expenditures, not life cycle costs. A similar range
has been cited for the cost of avionics. These preliminary figures were
based on rough estimates and a great deal of NextGen system definition
work has occurred since then. Estimates now under development represent
a much more structured and verifiable cost estimating process. All
known NextGen programs and activities are being identified, their costs
gathered or developed, adjustments (in terms of program maturity) are
being applied, and then the overall data is being evaluated for
completeness. There will also be sensitivity analysis to account for
changes in the aviation environment, demand, and funding levels. On
this basis, it will be possible to apply useful confidence levels to
programs with known requirements. It should be noted that requirements
for many key NextGen programs such as Data Communications and System
Wide Information Management as well as requirements for a common
automation platform have not been established. This means that a final,
highly accurate cost estimate will not be available until these
programs have fully developed requirements.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV
to Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham
Question. Several industry stakeholders have called for the
development of clear performance metrics to track the modernization of
the ATC system. Further, stakeholders have noted these metrics should
focus on the performance of the ATC system, not FAA activities. What
special metrics does GAO believe should be used to track the FAA's
progress in modernizing the ATC system?
Answer. We agree that it is critical to have clear and transparent
metrics to manage and track the implementation of NextGen. You can't
manage what you can't measure. Metrics are important to manage any
system, but especially one of NextGen's size and complexity. The
transformation from the current radar-based air navigation system to
the satellite-based NextGen will require the cooperation and
participation of multiple stakeholders, including four cabinet-level
agencies and other Federal organizations, commercial and general
aviation, and aircraft and avionics manufacturers. In addition,
integrating a new technology or new procedures into the National
Airspace System requires coordination within several FAA lines of
business. For example, a change in procedures that would allow the use
of closely spaced parallel runways at airports, which could in turn
increase capacity and efficiency, would require coordination among FAA
units to develop the appropriate standards, procedures, and
regulations; the aviation safety unit, which will need to certify the
safety of the procedures; and controllers and pilots, who will need to
be trained. All of this must take place before the new procedures can
be implemented.
Through our work, which has included interviews with key
stakeholders, we have found a consensus emerging that the
transformation to NextGen should focus first on implementing
capabilities that are available in the relative near-term and mid-term
(2012-2018), and can help address the current system's capacity and
efficiency challenges. We agree with those stakeholders who say that
the metrics should focus on ``outcomes'' rather than process. A focus
on outcomes is particularly important to demonstrate to the airlines
that they will derive real benefits from purchasing and installing
NextGen avionics on their aircraft. Furthermore, as early-adopting
airlines start to equip their aircraft with those avionics,
identifiable returns on investment, such as operational benefits and
cost savings, will be important to create further incentives for other
airlines to equip their aircraft. Therefore, specific metrics should be
developed to measure the impact of specific improvements introduced in
the National Airspace System. Such metrics could include reductions in
jet fuel consumption associated with specific system operational
improvements, increases in the number of take-offs and landings during
bad weather, reductions in flight times for NextGen-equipped aircraft,
or reductions in delays attributable to NextGen-enabled capabilities at
specific airports.
At the request of this Committee and other Congressional
Committees, we are planning to begin a study on the development and use
of appropriate metrics for measuring progress in the implementation of
NextGen capabilities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham
Question 1. Does GAO support the creation of a single program
office to facilitate the implementation of NextGen?
Answer. During our work for this Committee, industry and some
government stakeholders often advocated the creation of a single
program office because this organizational structure is familiar to
them. For example, when Boeing decides to build a new aircraft, it
establishes a program office. The program office is given
responsibility, authority, and a budget for all aspects of the aircraft
program. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration adopted a
similar structure for the moon landing program, establishing a program
office with responsibility and accountability for achieving the
mission.
We agree that having a single office in charge of NextGen would
have many advantages. For example, it would help to create clear
accountability for outcomes and encourage the establishment of clear
lines of communication with the numerous stakeholders involved in
NextGen. FAA's recent reorganization reflected an effort to put a
single office in charge of NextGen. According to the Chief Operating
Officer of the Air Traffic Organization, there is now one ``team'' with
one person in charge to plan, implement, and oversee NextGen. That one
person is the Senior Vice President for NextGen and Operations
Planning. However, as we have recently reported, this position does not
have budget authority over several key NextGen projects and is not as
highly placed within FAA's organization as other FAA executives with
responsibilities for NextGen-related activities who are Associate
Administrators. Furthermore, this reorganization--along with the
creation under Executive Order 13479 of a new support staff for the
Senior Policy Committee within the Office of the Secretary--has led to
significant uncertainty about the roles and responsibilities of the
Director of the newly created support staff, the Senior Vice President,
the Director of the Joint Planning and Development Office, and other
advisory bodies associated with NextGen.
One option to address concerns about the current organizational
structure for NextGen would be to create an Associate Administrator for
NextGen. Establishing this new position would elevate the NextGen
program office in FAA's organizational structure. However, further
reorganization could be disruptive and likely to result in
uncertainties as new roles and responsibilities created by the
reorganization are defined and agreed upon. Therefore, we believe that
the outcomes of the current organizational structure are of more
immediate concern than the structure itself. In our view, the focus
should be on the extent to which the current structure results in the
implementation of operational capabilities that alleviate capacity
constraints and system inefficiencies and deliver agreed-upon outcomes.
Question 2. What steps can the FAA take to better communicate with
industry and other stakeholders to ensure that they fully understand
the content and objectives associated with implementing NextGen?
Answer. FAA has begun to improve communications with stakeholders
by issuing an implementation plan that strikes a better balance between
providing technical information and responding to stakeholders'
concerns that earlier iterations of plans were overly technical. In
addition, FAA has developed detailed roadmaps that identify next steps
and establish timelines for their completion. These documents differ
from earlier NextGen planning documents, such as the concept of
operations and enterprise architecture, which many stakeholders said
were not very useful for their understanding and planning. However,
some stakeholders told us they remain frustrated because the NextGen
planning documents still lack any clear commitments from FAA.
Another step in the right direction is FAA's establishment of the
NextGen Midterm Implementation Task Force to focus on ``NowGen''
development. This task force, which is to include representatives of
all relevant stakeholder groups, is charged with identifying those
technologies and capabilities that can be implemented in the relative
near term and midterm and showing airlines how they can develop
business cases for accelerating efforts to equip their aircraft to
achieve those capabilities. FAA has also increased opportunities for
representatives of its largest labor unions to participate in the
planning of NextGen and has promised further outreach. For example,
going forward, participation in the task force would allow these groups
to have input at a key early stage of implementation. In addition, the
resolution of labor issues has been identified as a top priority of the
new FAA leadership. To move forward, both FAA and the unions must
recognize the value of setting aside differences and working together
to implement the vision of NextGen and realize its promised benefits.
However, given longstanding difficulties related to this issue, we
believe further monitoring by and consultation with Congress are
warranted.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Ensign to
Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham
Question 1. We have been talking about or planning NextGen
modernization for about 7 years now and we are still working on the
plans. What do we need to do so that 7 years from now we can be here
talking about the substantial progress that we have made and the
improvement in the safety, efficiency, and capacity of the National
Airspace System?
Answer. To ensure that it moves from planning to progress, FAA must
identify the operational capabilities that can be achieved with
currently available technologies and procedures and develop the
validations, certifications, rules, and other efforts needed to deploy
those technologies and procedures in a timely manner. Known as
``NowGen,'' this effort usually refers to capabilities FAA plans to
implement between 2012 and 2018. Concurrently, FAA will need to ensure
that pilots, controllers, and technicians receive the training
necessary to implement the new capabilities. FAA's creation of the
NextGen Midterm Implementation Task Force is a key first step toward
implementing NowGen. Charged with identifying critical near-term and
midterm capabilities and developing a consensus among industry
stakeholders, the task force plans to issue recommendations to FAA,
that FAA must then follow through on to ensure that the identified
capabilities can be deployed quickly, safely, and efficiently. To the
extent that it measures outcomes achieved, such as increases in
efficiency and capacity, rather than processes completed or actions
taken, FAA will be able to demonstrate the results of its efforts to
Congress and the public.
To deploy the new capabilities identified by the task force,
airlines will need to equip their aircraft with the necessary avionics.
However, as we have reported, airlines face a number of disincentives
to early investment in new technologies. Therefore, FAA must develop
specific strategies for airlines and other users of the national
airspace system (NAS) to invest as early as possible in the necessary
avionics equipment. FAA has outlined principles that will govern its
efforts to accelerate equipage. These principles include providing
operational benefits to early adopters of new technologies (the ``best-
equipped, best-served'' concept) and possibly using financial
incentives to minimize the business risk for airlines. However, FAA
must now develop specific plans for realizing such operational benefits
in the NAS, identify their potential magnitude, and specify how the
financial incentives will be structured.
Question 2. Stakeholder involvement in NextGen is absolutely
critical to its success. How well is FAA including stakeholders,
including air traffic controllers, in NextGen decisions? Are there any
obstacles to stakeholder cooperation that need to be addressed or
eliminated?
Answer. FAA has recently made some progress in including air
traffic controllers and technicians. For example, it has used active
controllers as subject matter experts and allocated seats on the
NextGen Management Board to representatives of both the controllers'
and the technicians' unions. Controller union officials have likewise
reported participating in several NextGen planning and decision-making
groups. However, officials from both unions have continued to express
concerns that their unions are not involved in selecting the subject
matter experts that participate in NextGen activities and that their
involvement in NextGen efforts remains limited. In our view, long-
standing labor issues continue to prevent FAA from involving these key
groups more extensively and limit these groups participation in NextGen
activities. Recent direction from the Chairmen and Ranking Members of
the Senate Commerce Science and Transportation Committee and its
Aviation Subcommittee to the unions and FAA that they find a way to
work together for the greater good could, if implemented, contribute to
easing tensions between labor and management at FAA.
Going forward, participation in the NextGen Midterm Implementation
Task Force, which is designed to build stakeholder consensus, would
allow these groups to have input at a key early stage of
implementation. In addition, the resolution of labor issues has been
identified as a top priority of the new FAA leadership. To move
forward, both FAA and the unions must recognize the value of setting
aside differences and working together to implement the vision of
NextGen and realize its promised benefits. However, given the long-
standing difficulties related to this issue, we believe further
monitoring by and consultation with Congress are warranted.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
Joe Kolshak
Question 1. If the necessary infrastructure were in place, how soon
could the airline industry equip commercial aircraft with NextGen
Avionics?
Answer. Through leadership and investment by the Federal
Government, ADS-B and other proven air traffic technologies, such as
RNP/RNAV, GBAS and Electronic Flight Bags, could be deployed, and the
resulting benefits to the traveling public, the environment and the
Nation's economy could be delivered in the next 3-4 years.
Question 2. In your opinion, would the airline industry support the
creation of a single program office to facilitate the implementation of
NextGen?
Answer. Yes. Because of its complexity, scope, and national
importance, we believe NextGen demands a single program office to
provide necessary leadership and ensure success.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Ensign to
Joe Kolshak
Question. ADS-B is a cornerstone technology for NextGen. While FAA
plans to mandate ``ADS-B Out,'' the majority of airspace user benefits
and costs are associated with ``ADS-B In'' and cockpit displays. From
your company's perspective, what needs to be done to facilitate the
quick deployment of these technologies?
Answer. Current plans call for deployment of ground-based
infrastructure by 2013 and mandatory aircraft equipage by 2020. This
plan delays the benefits of air traffic modernization, including better
customer service, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and overall economic
improvement, for far too long. Through leadership and investment by the
Federal Government, ADS-B and other proven air traffic technologies
should be accelerated, and the resulting benefits to the traveling
public, the environment and the Nation's economy could be delivered in
the next 3-4 years. The U.S. Government should finance and provide
incentives for ADS-B avionics equipage across air transport, general
aviation, government and DoD aircraft to accelerate deployment and
assure maximum return on investment for taxpayers and system users.
There are various ways to make equipage more affordable, including
general fund stimulus, incentives, leasing, and other creative
financing techniques. In addition, procedure improvements such as
``best-equipped, best served'' and reduced separation standards will
help to deliver benefits sooner and improve the business case for
accelerated equipage.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
Dale Wright
Question 1. From NATCA's position, how many more Air Traffic
Controller positions are needed to adequately support our Nation's
airspace?
Answer. In 1998, the FAA and NATCA jointly authorized a staffing
standard derived from scientific formula which took into account time
and motion studies, sector complexity and workload, number of
operations on the 90th percentile day, and relevant non-operational
activities (i.e., training, leave). As part of its Controller Workforce
Plan, the FAA abandoned these scientifically-based allocations and
established staffing ranges for each air traffic control facility,
which it modified slightly in 2008. These ranges represented a
reduction in controller staffing of between 20 and 25 percent across
the system.
Rather than basing its staffing goals on an accurate and precise
scientific assessment of each facility's requirements for safe
operation, the FAA has designed these ranges in order to deliberately
mislead stakeholders about the staffing crisis currently facing the air
traffic control system in this country. They were designed in order to
meet specific budget goals, with regional directors identifying the
number of air traffic control positions it could fund at each facility
and remain within its fixed budgets.\1\ NATCA has reason to believe
that the FAA's official staffing ranges were engineered by the Air
Traffic Organization (ATO) Finance office, rather than the ATO Safety
Office based on a memo written by the workforce staffing manager, Jodi
McCarthy.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Letter from FAA Regional Administrator Christopher R. Blum,
Central Region, to Congressman Dennis Moore. February 22, 2006.
\2\ Untitled memo from Jodi S. McCarthy, ATO-T Finance, Manager,
Workforce Staffing. Received February 28, 2007 on the topic of the
Staffing ranges featured in the 2007 Controller Workforce Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA attempted to justify this budget-based staffing standard by
presenting a pseudo-scientific justification for its staffing numbers
in its controller workforce plan. The FAA's reasoning is based on an
average of the following:
1. Scientific Data--The FAA does not specify which study this
refers to, who conducted it, or whether the study was conducted
by an unbiased third party. It has thus far refused to provide
NATCA with the details of the study parameters or the results.
2. Current staffing at peer facilities--As the entire system is
suffering the same staffing shortage, peer facilities will be
equally understaffed. Therefore using these as a basis of
comparison yields a dangerously low standard.
3. Past staffing lows--The FAA misleadingly refers to this
comparison as the past year of ``highest productivity.''
However, it goes on to define productivity as the highest
number of operations per controller--or the year when the
fewest controllers were relied upon to control the largest
amount of traffic--without taking into account error rates,
delays, or effect on the work force. By using this definition
of productivity the FAA is selecting a dangerously low staffing
number as a standard again.
4. Managers' advice--The FAA misleadingly refers to this as
``service unit input.'' This input did not include input from
NATCA and came entirely from within FAA management ranks who
are under pressure to conceal the extent of the staffing
shortage and assure Congress and the flying public that all is
under control. Therefore this too is likely to yield a
dangerously low and inaccurate estimate of needed staffing.
NATCA recognizes that circumstances have changed since 1998. There
have been some technological advances, changes in traffic flow,
increases or decreases in service at particular airports or facilities,
and changes in facility alignments and boundaries. There is also an
increased training burden on the workforce as a result of the current
staffing crisis. All of these affect the staffing needs of the both the
system as a whole and individual facilities. As a result we are not
comfortable giving concrete estimate for the number of additional
controllers needed to safely and efficiently support the National
Airspace System (NAS). Rather we would like to see a new scientific
study, conducted by an independent 3rd party, preferably the National
Academy of Sciences, in an open and transparent manner that would again
be able to provide a scientific basis for the systems air traffic
controller staffing needs. The FAA and NATCA would then be able to
utilize this scientific study to work together to develop a staffing
standard that is designed to meet the needs of the NAS.
Question 2. Does NATCA support the creation of a single program
office to facilitate the implementation of NextGen?
Answer. NATCA does support the creation of a single program office
that would facilitate the development and implementation of NextGen. It
is important that NextGen be developed in a way that comprehensively
considers and addresses the impact changes would have on the system as
a whole. The piecemeal approach that the FAA has used for realignment
initiatives and airspace redesign has yielded problematic results that
have compromised the safety of the system and the efficacy of the
projects. A single program office would be better positioned to ensure
a holistic approach to this major modernization undertaking.
Furthermore, a single program office would enable accountability
for NextGen. This office must have the authority to do what is
necessary to ensure that NextGen initiatives remain within budget and
on time, without compromising safety or effectiveness of the projects.
Lastly, this office must serve as the point of contact for
stakeholders. Stakeholders in general, and NATCA in particular must be
given the opportunity to meaningfully collaborate on NextGen from
development through implementation. NATCA's members are frontline
workers who are able to provide vital insight to help the team identify
and address human-interface issues and other concerns. Doing so on the
front-end rather than during implementation will save the agency time,
taxpayer money and resources while avoiding potential damage to the
integrity of the air traffic control system. Because NATCA's members
have an intimate understanding of frontline air traffic control, they
are uniquely qualified to provide insight into the needs of the system,
the utility of the FAA's proposed technology, and the usability of the
products included under the NextGen umbrella. It is therefore important
that stakeholders collaborate directly with this single NextGen program
office, in order to minimize the chance of miscommunication.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Mark Begich to
T. K. Kallenbach
Question. Do manufacturers have enough information on NextGen
avionics equipage standards to produce the necessary equipment and
instrumentation necessary for the aviation industry?
Answer. As I mentioned in my testimony, there are a number of
NextGen capabilities ready for implementation today including Required
Navigation Performance (RNP), GPS Ground-Based Augmentation System
(GBAS), Automatic Dependent Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B) ``OUT'',\1\
and Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA). For these capabilities,
manufacturers have sufficient information on standards, and in most
cases, already have solutions developed and ready to be deployed. These
capabilities go a long way toward improving the performance of our air
transportation system in the near and mid-term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ADS-B ``OUT'' is the capability to broadcast position and
identification information off of the aircraft for use by the ground
ATC system or other aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, more capabilities are needed to stay ahead of air traffic
demand and fully implement the NextGen system. Follow-on capabilities,
including ADS-B ``IN'' \2\ and associated applications, data link
communications, and full 4-dimensional flight plans, require additional
definition before manufacturers are able to develop solutions. It is
important that this definition work be accelerated, in parallel with
the deployment of the already developed NextGen capabilities (above).
With parallel deployment and standard development efforts, we can
ensure the next wave of follow-on capabilities is ready to go when
needed, and that they will efficiently support on-going air
transportation system growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ADS-B ``IN'' is the capability to receive position and
identification information from other aircraft or surface vehicles for
use by the flight crew on the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------