Aviation Infrastructure: Challenges Associated With Building and
Maintaining Runways (Testimony, 10/05/2000, GAO/GAO-01-90T).

This testimony discusses challenges associated with building new runways
and with ensuring that existing runways are properly maintained. Recent
flight delays and cancellations as well as significant media attention
have heightened public concern about the need to increase the capacity
of the National Airspace System. According to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), 24 of the nation's 50 busiest commercial service
airports have proposed, planned, or begun construction on new runways
and runway extensions at an estimated cost of $6.5 billion. Airports and
FAA face challenges in building new runways and in determining at what
point runway pavement conditions warrant repair in order for existing
runways to be maintained in the most cost-effective manner. The federal
government and the aviation industry are involved in several efforts to
balance airports' growth with environmental concerns and to address
runway maintenance in a cost-effective way. Additional actions would
help minimize some delays associated with adding capacity and problems
with preserving existing capacity.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  GAO-01-90T
     TITLE:  Aviation Infrastructure: Challenges Associated With
	     Building and Maintaining Runways
      DATE:  10/05/2000
   SUBJECT:  Environmental monitoring
	     Airports
	     Noise pollution control
	     Air pollution control
	     Federal aid for transportation
	     Air transportation operations
	     Commercial aviation
IDENTIFIER:  FAA National Airspace System Plan
	     FAA Airport Improvement Program
	     FAA Part 150 Program

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
*****************************************************************
GAO-01-90T

AVIATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Challenges Associated With Building and Maintaining Runways Statement of
Gerald L. Dillingham, Director, Physical Infrastructure

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Aviation,

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery Expected at 9: 30 a. m., October 5, 2000

GAO- 01- 90T

1 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

We are pleased to be here today to testify on challenges associated with
building new runways and with ensuring that existing runways are properly
maintained. Recent flight delays and cancellations as well as significant
media attention to them have heightened public concern about the need to
increase the capacity of the National Airspace System. Airport development
is key to expanding capacity. However, building new airports is difficult,
in part, because of the high cost of construction and the environmental
impact of airports- particularly concerns about noise and air quality. The
construction of new runways and the maintenance of existing runways are
options for improving the capacity at existing airports. According to FAA,
24 of the nation's 50 busiest commercial service airports have proposed,
planned, or begun construction on new runways and runway extensions at an
estimated cost of $6.5 billion. 1 (See app. I for information on individual
airports.) In addition, FAA provided $318 million in airport improvement
grants to the 50 busiest commercial service airports for runway
rehabilitation and maintenance between fiscal years 1995 and 1999.

In considering options to expand capacity, policymakers face a challenge in
determining where to invest federal dollars to bring about the greatest
enhancements while considering the environmental impact on adjacent
communities. Our testimony, based largely on recently issued reports 2 will
highlight environmental and maintenance challenges airports face, actions
under way by FAA and the aviation industry to overcome these challenges, and
additional actions that need to be taken. In summary:

1 Two airports have either new runways and/ or extensions planned, proposed,
or currently under construction, but cost estimates have not yet been
determined. Cost information was included for another airport's new runway,
but not for its runway extension. See Aviation Capacity Enhancement Plan,
Federal Aviation Administration, Dec. 1999.

2 A viation and the Environment: Airport Operations and Future Growth
Present Environmental Challenges (GAO/ RCED- 00- 153, Aug. 30, 2000),
Aviation and the Environment: Results From a Survey of the Nation's 50
Busiest Commercial Service Airports( GAO/ RCED- 00- 222, Aug. 30, 2000), and
Airfield Pavement:

Keeping the Nation's Runways in Good Condition Could Require Substantially
Higher Spending (GAO/ RCED- 98- 226, July 31, 1998).

2

ï¿½ Airports and FAA face challenges in building new runways and in
determining at what point runway pavement conditions warrant repair in order
for existing runways to be maintained in the most cost- effective manner. In
the case of new runways, airports must address the potential environmental
impact of aircraft noise and air pollutant emissions that new infrastructure
is likely to generate. For example, community concerns with aircraft noise
are already high around many airports, and adding new runways may generate
additional noise and community concerns. Moreover, airports in areas that
are not in compliance with Clean Air Act requirements may find it
challenging to add new runways because of the concern about increased air
quality problems caused by additional aircraft and cars using the airport.
This difficulty is important, given that 33 of the nation's 50 busiest
commercial service airports are in areas that do not meet the act's
requirements. As we recently reported, shortcomings in the environmental
review process add to the challenge and can result in delays in projects
without necessarily providing commensurate environmental benefits. For
example, meeting overlapping federal and state environmental requirements
can cause airports rework, additional negotiations, and renegotiations. For
runways that are in use, data found in pavement management systems can
pinpoint when runways should be rehabilitated based on pavement conditions.
However, FAA has only collected this type of information on a case- bycase
basis and may not be in a position to weigh the importance of similar
projects at different airports. Our July 1998 report included
recommendations to address this problem.

ï¿½ The federal government and the aviation industry are involved in a number
of efforts to balance airports' growth with environmental concerns and to
address runway maintenance in a cost- effective manner. For example, FAA
supports airports' efforts to mitigate aircraft noise through a voluntary
noise compatibility program and has developed guidance for local governments
and other interested parties to encourage compatible land uses around
airports. Moreover, many airports conduct public outreach and education
efforts to address aircraft noise and other environmental

3 issues. In addition, the Secretary of Transportation has a study under way
to assess

the environmental review requirements pertaining to airport improvement
projects that will potentially address the shortcomings identified above,
among others. Furthermore, FAA is taking steps as we recommended to improve
the quality of some data collected on runway conditions at airports in the
national airport system in order to help ensure that dollars are spent
effectively on rehabilitating existing runways. For example, the agency
requires airports to provide pavement condition data to support certain
grant applications for pavement projects.

ï¿½ Additional actions would help to minimize some delays associated with
adding capacity and problems with preserving existing capacity. With respect
to the environmental review process that is required to build new runways,
these actions include (1) eliminating overlap between federal and state
environmental requirements, (2) eliminating duplicative air quality
processes under federal laws, and (3) clarifying guidance and providing
adequate technical assistance to airports to help them meet Clean Air Act
requirements. As for maintaining existing runways, it is important that FAA
fully implement our recommendations to obtain runway pavement condition data
from all airports and maintain this information in a national database. This
would allow the agency to use these data to forecast pavement conditions
and, therefore, determine in advance when maintenance and rehabilitation can
be done most cost- effectively.

Background

New runways or other major expansion projects are subject to federal laws
and regulations that address, among other things, environmental concerns
about the noise generated by aircraft operations and the impact on air
quality of burning fossil fuels to operate automobiles, airport service
vehicles, and aircraft. These laws give various responsibilities to federal
agencies- including FAA and EPA- and to state and local governments.

4 FAA works with airport officials to help them minimize the environmental
effects of

expansion projects, including providing grants to reduce the impact of noise
on surrounding communities. In addition, the agency is responsible for
preparing documents to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act.
The act sets forth a broad national policy aimed at protecting the quality
of the environment and requires that federal actions receive an
environmental review, the level of which depends on an action's potential
impact on the environment. EPA reviews environmental impact statements
prepared by federal agencies, including FAA.

EPA also oversees the implementation of the Clean Air Act, as amended, which
regulates the emission of air pollutants from area, stationary, and mobile
sources. However, the day- to- day responsibility for overseeing the
implementation of the act is generally delegated to the states. EPA has also
encouraged voluntary measures to reduce aviation emissions and has
undertaken numerous regulatory actions, such as setting standards for
aircraft engine emissions. Other federal agencies play more limited roles in
assisting airport officials with managing the environmental impact of
airport operations.

Runways, like highways, deteriorate from weather and use. Left unchecked,
such deterioration can eventually pose safety risks to planes that are
taking off or landing. Maintaining runway pavement includes preventive
maintenance and rehabilitation of aging pavement. Preventive maintenance is
designed to forestall the need for runway rehabilitation, which typically
involves adding a strengthening layer to an existing surface that has not
deteriorated to the point of needing complete replacement. Federal grants
through the Airport Improvement Program are available for rehabilitating and
maintaining airport runways and since 1982, this program has provided over
$3 billion for this purpose.

5

Runways Present Environmental and Maintenance Challenges for FAA and
Airports

FAA and the nation's airports face a dual challenge: building new runways to
expand capacity and maintaining existing runways to ensure that the system's
current capacity is fully utilized. Meeting these challenges will require
addressing airport noise and air quality issues and shortcomings in the
environmental review process associated with building new runways. In
addition, FAA will need to improve its process for considering which runway
maintenance projects to fund.

Airports Face Noise and Air Quality Issues

Noise. According to our survey of officials from the nation's 50 busiest
commercial service airports, noise generated by aircraft operations is the
most significant environmental concern facing them now and in the future.
Additional runways could potentially mean more air traffic, changes in
flight patterns, and potentially a larger number of people affected by high
aircraft noise levels.

Community dissatisfaction with aircraft noise is already high around many
airports. For example, citizens' groups and local government officials from
several communities surrounding the Los Angeles International Airport said
they are dissatisfied with the airport's efforts to address the impact of
aircraft noise. In particular, these community and local officials are
concerned that the airport has “incrementally” increased its
capacity by 20 million passengers annually without any type of environmental
review. In Miami, complaints about aircraft noise have increased from about
18 to 19 per month in 1993 to 300 to 400 per month in 1999, and communities
are showing resistance to the airport's current expansion plans.

6 In addition, because some of the nation's busiest airports do not
participate in FAA's

voluntary noise compatibility program (otherwise known as the Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Program), 3 citizens in communities surrounding these airports
are not eligible to receive the benefits of federal funding from this
program designed to mitigate the impact of noise on residents. In
particular, 14 of the nation's 50 busiest commercial service airports do not
participate in this program- leaving more than 320,000 people living near
these 14 airports without access to program funds set aside for noise
mitigation.

Despite the efforts of airports, airlines, FAA, and others to mitigate the
effects of aircraft noise on surrounding communities, citizens' concerns
persist today and are likely to increase as airports seek to expand- by
adding runways and other means. Many aircraft noise complaints come from
residents who live outside areas that are considered
“noiseimpacted.” For example, officials from 35 of the nation's
50 busiest airports reported that more than half of their noise complaints
came from areas that FAA has designated as compatible with airport
operations in terms of noise. 4 Given this, increased traffic resulting from
new runways could lead to more complaints from both citizens within and
outside areas that are considered noise- impacted.

Air Quality. According to our survey, air quality is a major concern for
many of the nation's busiest commercial service airports and is expected to
become a more serious issue for them in the future, particularly if runways
are added to airports and flight operations are increased. Minimizing future
air emissions at airports is important, given that 33 of the nation's 50
busiest commercial airports are located in areas in violation of the act's
requirements. As a result, airports may find it challenging to demonstrate
that new runway projects will not create additional air quality problems.

3 The Part 150 Program provides airports with, among other things, funding
to soundproof buildings and acquire homes in areas where noise levels are
high. 4 Areas around airports that experience aircraft noise below the 65-
decibel Day- Night Sound Level are considered to be compatible with airport
operations.

7 The major source of air pollutant emissions at airports is vehicles that
rely on fossil

fuels, including aircraft, vehicles transporting people to and from the
airport, and ground support equipment. Officials from 27 of the 50 busiest
commercial service airports reported that the demand for parking is
currently a major concern. Options to reduce the number of cars and buses
traveling to an airport and to help meet air quality standards include using
intermodal centers-- including light rail connections- and establishing
remote park and ride facilities for passengers and airport employees.

Shortcomings in the Environmental Review Process Can Delay Airport Projects
Satisfying federal and state environmental requirements designed to help
ensure that projects that expand capacity do not adversely affect the
environment can be a lengthy, time- consuming process, and shortcomings in
the review process can delay these projects. This is true especially when
expansion project, such as runways, require the most detailed reviews under
the National Environmental Policy Act- known as environmental impact
statements (EIS). FAA prepares the EIS in coordination with the airport.
According to an FAA senior environmental manager, the EIS process takes an
average of about 2.5 years to complete.

Overlapping Federal and State Environmental Requirements Can Delay Airport
Projects

Our review of environmental requirements impacting airport operations and
growth found that some federal and state environmental review processes can
overlap and delay airport projects. 5 According to some airport officials,
airport projects in some states may have to undergo two completely
independent, redundant environmental reviews that do not necessarily provide
incremental environmental benefits. For example, officials from one airport
said that the consensus developed under federal environmental review
processes for an expansion project reduced the number of feasible runway
options from 17 to 4, which meant that the airport would only need to
perform an environmental

5 GAO/ RCED- 00- 153, Aug. 30, 2000.

8 review of the 4 options. Under the state's process, which came after the
federal process,

the airport was forced to reconsider all 17 options- lengthening the time
required to select a preferred option.

According to airport and FAA officials, when airport projects require the
destruction of wetlands, duplicative negotiations with multiple governmental
entities may be required. The Army Corps of Engineers acknowledges that this
is a problem in some states. For example, an airport official from Florida
said that airport officials have had to go through time- consuming
negotiations with three different agencies to obtain wetlands permits. FAA
regional officials told us that some airports in the New England region must
repeatedly negotiate wetland destruction agreements with different levels of
government.

Air Quality Processes Under Federal Laws Burden Some Airports

As we reported in August 2000, airports seeking to expand capacity must
address two sets of air quality requirements under federal law that can be
duplicative and can cause delays in completing federal environmental
documentation- creating burdens. Federal law requires the governor of each
state to certify that federally funded additions to airport runways or major
expansions conform to local air quality standards. Similarly, the Clean Air
Act, as amended, requires FAA to determine that the emissions from airport
projects conform to a state's plan to implement national air quality
standards. These requirements can delay airport projects in two ways. First,
delays can occur if environmental reviews are required to be done
sequentially- federal first, followed by the state- and the federal review
does not satisfy state requirements, which can be more stringent. Second,
each time a runway project is undertaken, many states go through the time-
consuming process of redeveloping expertise and a process for certifying
that new or expanded runways meet air quality requirements because these
types of reviews are not routinely done. The relearning costs money and
causes delays and frustration.

9 Unclear Federal Guidance and Insufficient Technical Assistance Makes

It Difficult for Airports to Understand and Fulfill Their Responsibilities
Under the Clean Air Act

As we recently reported, despite available federal guidance and technical
assistance, a wide range of officials from airports and federal and state
agencies remain confused about what is required for airports to conform to
local air quality standards when undertaking capacity expansion projects.
This is due, in part, to the fact that in- depth reviews- for projects such
as new runways- to determine conformity with the Clean Air Act occur
infrequently. EPA's regulations for general conformity under the act are
very broad because they are designed to accommodate a diverse group of
facilities-– such as ski resorts and coal mines- leaving airports
without the specificity they need to fully understand and meet their
responsibilities. In addition, because of the infrequent nature of these
reviews, some FAA and EPA regional staff lack experience with applying the
Clean Air Act's requirements to airports. As a result, some airport
officials may undertake analyses that are more complex and costly than
necessary.

Process Needed to Help Ensure Timely and Cost- Effective Runway Maintenance
It is important not to consider the construction of new runways in
isolation- preserving existing runway capacity is also critical to the
efficient operation of the National Airspace System and depends on timely
maintenance. This maintenance is particularly important for airports that
are physically unable to expand because they are surrounded by water or
development. For some of these airports, operating runways continuously is
critical to helping maintain current capacity. As we reported in 1998, 6
while the runways at the nation's airports were in generally good condition,
a small but significant portion of runway pavement needed immediate
attention. The timing of runway maintenance is crucial if it is to be done
in a cost- effective manner. 7 Our work has shown that

6 GAO/ RCED- 98- 226, July 31, 1998. 7 Reference to timing is in the context
of determining the condition of the pavement so that proposed rehabilitation
projects will deliver the best return for the dollars spent. We are not
referring to the time- in terms of hours of the day- to perform the work.

10 rehabilitating pavement in poor condition may cost 2 to 3 times as much
as rehabilitating

pavement in good condition because more expensive methods may be required.
For example, in 1998, we estimated that an up- front investment of $774
million and an additional $606 million over 9 years would help to avoid an
unmet need of $2.37 billion at the end of 2008 that would occur if the
historical annual funding level of $162 million was maintained over this
same period. 8 This is because deferred maintenance costs so much more.

Runway rehabilitation projects are given high priority under FAA's National
Priority System- the agency's primary method for determining which grant
applications from individual airports should be funded. The challenge, in
part, is for FAA is to collect and maintain accurate, consistent sources of
information about runway conditions at all airports in the national system.
9 In turn, this information can be used to prioritize requests to help
ensure runway maintenance is conducted at the most economical point in time.
FAA has only collected such information on a case- by- case basis. As we
recommended, improvements in the quality of the data and a comprehensive
national database containing this information would allow FAA and airports
to maximize their investment in runways by pinpointing the most cost-
effective time for maintenance and replacement. 10

Federal and Aviation Industry Efforts Are Under Way to Address These
Challenges

The federal government has been working collaboratively with the aviation
industry to help balance operations and growth with environmental impact. In
addition, FAA has some efforts under way to improve the quality of data on
runway pavement conditions.

8 The historical funding level cited includes the total amount of Airport
Improvement Program funds allocated to rehabilitation and maintenance of
runways from fiscal year 1982 through 1997. 9 FAA's national airport system-
the primary network of airports throughout the country- comprises more than
3,300 airports. 10 Congress also directed the FAA to fully evaluate options
for improving data available to the agency on pavement conditions of
airports in the national airport system and report by April 2001.

11 The Federal Efforts

FAA provides grant funding to mitigate the impact of aircraft noise on
communities adjacent to airports. For example, through an agency grant
program called the Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program, FAA has spent $2.7
billion from fiscal year 1982 through 1999 to provide airports with, among
other things, funding to soundproof buildings and acquire homes in areas
where noise levels are high. In addition, for fiscal years 1992 through
1999, FAA approved the collection of $1.6 billion in passenger fees for
noiserelated projects. The agency also provides guidance to state and local
governments for their use in controlling and preventing incompatible land
uses near airports, such as homes and schools. This effort is particularly
important for future airport expansion because land use decisions that
conflict with aviation activity and airport facilities can make it difficult
for airports to grow to meet the increasing demand for air transportation.

According to our survey of the nation's 50 busiest commercial service
airports, most airport officials generally believe that FAA effectively
assists them with their environmental activities. For example, officials
from 32 of these airports reported that they were satisfied with the way FAA
answered their questions and addressed their concerns about environmental
issues. In addition, officials from over half of the airports reported that
FAA was effective in coordinating activities among its offices, providing
standard rules and guidance, and processing paperwork.

In 1998, EPA and FAA, in cooperation with the Air Transport Association,
created a stakeholder group on the local air quality issues associated with
airport operations. The group's goal is to find voluntary ways to track and
reduce the emission of air pollutants around airports. This effort has
brought together many groups to work on the issue of air quality, including
airline manufacturers, airports, state and local environmental regulators,
and nonprofit interest groups. To date, this group has worked to establish a
baseline of the types and sources of emissions from airports and options for
reducing

12 these emissions. The group hopes to have the aviation industry enter into
an agreement

by the fall of 2000 to achieve reductions in air pollutant emissions. The
Secretary of Transportation, as directed by Congress, is conducting a study
of federal environmental requirements related to the planning and approval
of airport improvement projects. This assessment is looking at coordination,
staffing, and time required for reviews, and has the potential to identify
more specific solutions for alleviating the burdens we identified.
Ultimately, addressing these shortcomings will require a coordinated effort
among FAA, EPA, states, airports, airlines, and others working with the
Congress.

The Aviation Industry Efforts

Airports: Airports have undertaken a wide range of activities to balance
their operations and growth with the environmental impact, including the use
of preferred flight paths and other measures to reduce the impact of
aircraft noise on surrounding communities and offering incentives to airport
tenants to reduce pollution from vehicles that support aircraft operations
and access to the airport. Some airports have also reduced the impact of
noise on surrounding communities by undertaking mitigation measures,
including acquiring noise- sensitive properties, relocating people,
modifying structures to reduce noise, encouraging compatible zoning, and
assisting in the sale of affected properties.

A number of airports also sponsor community noise roundtables, which include
local citizens' groups, FAA, airlines, and other interested parties working
collaboratively to address noise and other environmental concerns. For
example, the San Francisco International Airport created the San Francisco
Airport Roundtable in 1981- a voluntary body that includes representatives
from 13 Bay Area jurisdictions, FAA officials, airline advisers, air traffic
managers, and the airport director- to discuss and attempt to resolve
primarily noise- related issues. A representative of a national
nongovernmental organization on aviation noise cited the San Francisco
Airport Roundtable as a model for community involvement in the decision-
making process for airport development,

13 including the identification of environmental effects and concerns.
Similar

airport/ community noise groups have been established at other airports,
including the Fort Lauderdale/ Hollywood International Airport, the
Minneapolis/ St. Paul International Airport, the Oakland International
Airport, and Chicago's O'Hare International Airport.

Airlines: Airlines have also undertaken activities to reduce the impact of
their operations and growth on the environment, including working with local
citizens' groups to address aircraft noise issues; using airport- provided
power at gates that is less polluting than other sources, such as on- board
generators; increasing the use of ground support vehicles that rely on
alternative fuels to reduce emissions; and having aircraft use single
engines for taxiing. For example, when operationally feasible, the use of
single engines- instead of multiple engines- for taxiing can reduce the
impact on local air quality significantly. One airline estimates that its
use of this practice has reduced its fleet's fuel consumption by 40 million
gallons per year and, in turn, has reduced the impact of air pollutant
emissions.

FAA Has Taken Steps to Improve the Quality of Runway Pavement Data Acting on
recommendations from our 1998 report, FAA took steps in fiscal year 1999 to
revise its approach for evaluating the timing of runway maintenance
projects. One option we recommended was to improve the quality of the rating
criteria used by inspectors to yield more useful information. In response,
FAA requested information from a representative cross- section of airports,
evaluated these data in conjunction with our recommendations, and determined
that improved guidance for inspectors on rating the condition of runway
pavement was needed. According to FAA, training for inspectors should be
available by spring 2001. Similarly, as we recommended, FAA determined that
it would be beneficial for airports to submit pavement condition data or
comparable information in airport master plans and to encourage states to
include such data in their state system plans. In addition, FAA plans to
continue to require that airports provide such data to support certain types
of grant applications for pavement projects.

14

Additional Actions Could Help Airports to Expand Capacity and Effectively
Utilize Existing Runways

Some progress has been made in addressing challenges associated with
building new runways and in maintaining existing ones. However, several
actions, by federal and/ or state officials working with the Congress, could
help reduce the time required to meet environmental requirements for new
runway projects and improve the quality of information used to make
decisions about maintaining existing runways. As we have discussed in our
reports, these include the following:

ï¿½ eliminating the overlap between state and federal environmental
requirements;

ï¿½ streamlining requirements for obtaining permits to build on wetlands;

ï¿½ clarifying guidance and providing adequate technical assistance to
airports to help them meet Clean Air Act requirements for airport capacity
projects; and

ï¿½ creating a national database to better pinpoint the most cost- effective
time for runway maintenance and rehabilitation.

Given that the Congress has authorized nearly $10 billion to address airport
infrastructure needs over the next 3 years, it is critical to ensure that
sufficient attention is given to both maintaining runways and building new
ones so that this significant taxpayer investment is spent in the most cost-
effective manner.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to
respond to any questions that you or Members of the Subcommittee may have.

Contact and Acknowledgments

For further information, please contact Gerald L. Dillingham at (202) 512-
2834. Individuals making key contributions to this testimony included
Beverly Dulaney, Belva Martin, and Kieran McCarthy.

15

Appendix I Estimated Cost of Runways Planned, Proposed, or Currently Under

Construction

Millions

Airport Cost of new runway Cost of runway extension Total

Atlanta Intl. $450.0 $450.0 Baltimore- Wash. Intl. 150.0 150.0 Boston Logan
Intl. 50.0 50.0 Charlotte/ Douglas Intl. 140.0 $22.0 162.0 Cleveland-
Hopkins Intl. 467.0 40.0 507.0 Dallas/ Ft. Worth Intl. 367.3 92.0 459.3
Denver Intl. 160.0 160.0 Detroit MW County 116.5 116.5 Ft. Lauderdale Intl.
300.0 300.0 Houston/ GB Intl. 130.0 85.0 215.0 Indianapolis Intl. 80.0 80.0
Kansas City Intl. 12.0 12.0 Lambert St. Louis Intl. 850.0 50.0 900.0 Miami
Intl. 206.0 206.0 Milwaukee Intl. 160.0 160.0 Minneapolis- St. Paul Intl.
490.0 7. 0 497.0 Newark Intl. 55.0 55.0 New Orleans Intl. 400.0 400.0
Orlando Intl. 115.0 To be determined 115.0 Phoenix Intl. 180.4 7. 0 187.4
Port Columbus Intl. 100.0 100.0 Raleigh- Durham Intl. To be determined To be
determined 0.0 San Jose Intl. 54.3 54.3 Seattle Tacoma Intl. 750.0 750.0
Tampa Intl. To be determined To be determined 0.0 Wash. Dulles Intl. 400.0
400.0

Total 5762.2 724.3 6486.5

Source: Federal Aviation Administration, 1999 Aviation Capacity Enhancement
Plan, December 1999.

(348260)

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an e-
mail message with “info” in the body to

info@ www. gao. gov or visit GAO's World Wide Web home page at http:// www.
gao. gov

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Web site: http:// www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail: fraudnet@
gao. gov Automated answering system: 1- 800- 424- 5454
*** End of document ***