Aviation Safety: Opportunities Exist for FAA to Refine the Controller
Staffing Process (Chapter Report, 04/09/97, GAO/RCED-97-84).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Federal Aviation
Administration's (FAA) efforts to address short- and long-term
controller staffing needs, focusing on: (1) the key variables FAA uses
to project future controller staffing needs and evaluate their
reasonableness; (2) whether FAA has identified a sufficient number of
controller candidates to satisfy its short- and long-term staffing needs
and evaluate FAA's plans to train new controllers; and (3) impediments
that hinder FAA from staffing air traffic control (ATC) facilities at
specified levels.

GAO noted that: (1) FAA uses two key variables to project future
controller staffing needs; (2) while FAA's estimates of air traffic
growth are reasonable, GAO's analysis indicated that FAA could be
overstating retirements, which account for most controller attrition,
for fiscal years (FYs) 1999 through 2002; (3) rather than using actual
information on controllers' age and service time to project future
retirements, FAA bases its estimates on assumptions about when
controllers will be eligible to retire; (4) FAA has identified a
sufficient number of controller candidates to meet its short-term
staffing needs in FYs 1997 and 1998; (5) however, beyond FY 1998, it is
uncertain whether current sources can provide the controller candidates
FAA will need to meet its hiring goals for FYs 1999 through 2002; (6)
the majority of available candidates are controllers who were fired in
1981 and who FAA officials believe could be eligible to retire within a
few years of reemployment; (7) however, FAA has not conducted any
analysis to support this position; (8) to help meet its long-term hiring
goals, FAA is expanding its collegiate program to include more schools
and has reactivated the cooperative education program; (9) beginning in
FY 1998, FAA will require that all new controllers receive some training
at its Academy; (10) FAA believes that this will reduce on-the-job
training time and costs; (11) this revision, however, could increase the
federal costs of initial controller training because FAA will pay a
portion of training expenses currently being paid by participants in the
collegiate program; (12) FAA officials identified several principal
impediments that hinder their ability to staff ATC facilities at
specified levels; (13) the first is FAA headquarters' practice of
generally not providing funds to relocate controllers until the end of
the FY, which causes delayed controller moves and continued staffing
imbalances; (14) the second impediment is the limited ability of
regional officials to recruit controller candidates locally to fill
vacancies at ATC facilities; (15) in addition, FAA regional officials
also believe that limited hiring of new controllers in recent years has
hindered their ability to fill vacancies; (16) partly due to these
impediments, as of April 1996, about 53 percent of ATC facilities were
not staffed at levels specified by FAA's staffing standards; (17) there*

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

 REPORTNUM:  RCED-97-84
     TITLE:  Aviation Safety: Opportunities Exist for FAA to Refine the 
             Controller Staffing Process
      DATE:  04/09/97
   SUBJECT:  Air traffic controllers
             Air transportation operations
             Transportation safety
             Hiring policies
             Employee transfers
             Human resources training
             Personnel management
             Projections
             Attrition rates
             Personnel recruiting
IDENTIFIER:  FAA Air Traffic Control System
             FAA Air Traffic Controller Collegiate Training Initiative 
             Program
             Civil Service Retirement System
             Federal Employees Retirement System
             FAA Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium Air Traffic 
             Controller Training Program
             FAA Air Traffic Controller Cooperative Education Program
             FAA Interim Air Traffic Controller Incentive Pay Program
             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** 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.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to Congressional Requesters

April 1997

AVIATION SAFETY - OPPORTUNITIES
EXIST FOR FAA TO REFINE THE
CONTROLLER STAFFING PROCESS

GAO/RCED-97-84

Refining FAA's Controller Staffing Process

(341485)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  ATC - Air Traffic Control
  ATO - Office of Air Traffic Operations
  ATS - Air Traffic Services
  CSRS - Civil Service Retirement System
  CTI - collegiate training initiative
  DOD - Department of Defense
  FAA - Federal Aviation Administration
  FERS - Federal Employees Retirement System
  FPL - full performance level
  GAO - General Accounting Office
  MARC - Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium
  NATCA - National Air Traffic Controllers Association
  PATCO - Professional Air Traffic Control Organization
  PCS - permanent change of station
  TRACON - terminal radar approach control

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-271807

April 9, 1997

The Honorable Frank Wolf
Chairman
The Honorable Martin Olav Sabo
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Transportation
 and Related Agencies
Committee on Appropriations
House of Representatives

The Honorable James L.  Oberstar
Ranking Minority Member,
 Committee on Transportation
 and Infrastructure
House of Representatives

In response to your request, this report discusses the results of our
review of the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) efforts to
address short- and long-term controller staffing needs.  The report
contains recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation aimed at
enhancing FAA's ability to forecast and meet these needs. 

As arranged with your offices, unless you announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 7 days
after the date of this letter.  At that time, we will send copies of
the report to the Secretary of Transportation; the Administrator of
the FAA; other appropriate congressional committees; the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget; and other interested parties. 
We will also make copies available to others on request. 

If you or your staff have any questions, I can be reached at (202)
512-2834.  Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix
III. 

John H.  Anderson, Jr.
Director, Transportation Issues


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
============================================================ Chapter 0


   PURPOSE
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for managing
the nation's air transportation system so more than 18,000 aircraft
can annually carry 500 million passengers safely and on schedule. 
Because of significant hiring in the early 1980s to replace strikers
who had been fired, many of FAA's more than 17,000 air traffic
controllers may become eligible to retire within the next decade,
raising concerns that FAA could be left with too few fully trained
controllers. 

The Chairman and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Transportation, House Committee on Appropriations, and the Ranking
Member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
asked GAO to (1) identify the key variables FAA uses to project
future controller staffing needs and evaluate their reasonableness;
(2) determine whether the agency has identified a sufficient number
of controller candidates to satisfy its short- and long-term staffing
needs and evaluate FAA's plans to train new controllers; and (3)
identify impediments that hinder FAA from staffing air traffic
control (ATC) facilities at specified levels. 


   BACKGROUND
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2

In 1981, thousands of air traffic controllers who participated in a
nationwide strike were fired and barred by a presidential directive
from reemployment with FAA as air traffic controllers.  As a result
of the strike, FAA hired thousands of new controllers to rebuild its
controller workforce.  In 1995, following the repeal of the
directive, FAA began rehiring some of the fired controllers. 

FAA uses staffing standards forecast models to determine the staffing
needs for controllers and to formulate its annual staffing and budget
requests.  The models forecast needs using (1) periodic industrial
engineering studies that measure the amount of time it takes a
controller to perform necessary work tasks; (2) estimates of growth
in air traffic; and (3) estimates of attrition among controllers. 
The models are also used to determine the specified level of
controllers FAA needs to operate its ATC facilities. 

Air traffic controller candidates currently receive training from
several sources.  Most candidates with no prior controller experience
currently receive initial training at one of four post-secondary
educational institutions that participate in FAA's collegiate
training initiative program or at the Mid-America Aviation Resource
Consortium.\1 In addition, other candidates receive training as part
of FAA's cooperative education program, which allows students to
receive controller training while completing academic requirements
toward a college degree.  Once hired by FAA, these candidates receive
an average of 2 to 4 years of on-the-job training at ATC facilities
before being fully certified as controllers.  Candidates with prior
experience, such as former FAA or Department of Defense controllers,
receive refresher training at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, as well as shorter on-the-job training. 


--------------------
\1 The Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium is a federally funded
program under which students receive intensive air traffic controller
training.  The Congress established the program in 1989 to supplement
FAA's controller training program. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3

FAA uses two key variables--estimates of air traffic growth and
controller attrition--to project future controller staffing needs. 
While FAA's estimates of air traffic growth are reasonable, GAO's
analysis indicated that FAA could be overstating retirements, which
account for most controller attrition, for fiscal years 1999 through
2002.  Rather than using actual information on controllers' age and
service time to project future retirements, FAA bases its estimates
on assumptions about when controllers will be eligible to retire. 

FAA has identified a sufficient number of controller candidates to
meet its short-term staffing needs in fiscal years 1997 and 1998. 
However, beyond fiscal year 1998, it is uncertain whether current
sources can provide the controller candidates FAA will need to meet
its hiring goals for fiscal years 1999 through 2002.  The majority of
available candidates are controllers who were fired in 1981 and who
FAA officials believe could be eligible to retire within a few years
of reemployment.  However, FAA has not conducted any analysis to
support this position.  To help meet its long-term hiring goals, FAA
is expanding its collegiate program to include more schools and has
reactivated the cooperative education program. 

Beginning in fiscal year 1998, FAA will require that all new
controllers receive some training at its Academy.  FAA believes that
this will reduce on-the-job training time and costs.  This revision,
however, could increase the federal costs of initial controller
training because FAA will pay a portion of training expenses
currently being paid by participants in the collegiate program. 

FAA officials identified several principal impediments that hinder
their ability to staff ATC facilities at specified levels.  The first
is FAA headquarters' practice of generally not providing funds to
relocate controllers until the end of the fiscal year, which causes
delayed controller moves and continued staffing imbalances.  The
second impediment is the limited ability of regional officials to
recruit controller candidates locally to fill vacancies at ATC
facilities.  In addition, FAA regional officials also believe that
limited hiring of new controllers in recent years has hindered their
ability to fill vacancies.  Partly due to these impediments, as of
April 1996 about 53 percent of ATC facilities were not staffed at
levels specified by FAA's staffing standards.  Specifically, these
facilities were either more than 10 percent over or more than 10
percent under specified levels.  Although FAA officials believe
certain circumstances justify deviations from the staffing standards,
there are facilities where staffing differences are not justified. 
FAA has implemented several initiatives to improve its ability to
staff the facilities at specified levels.  It is too early, however,
to determine the effectiveness of these initiatives. 


   PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4


      FAA COULD IMPROVE ITS
      FORECASTS OF CONTROLLER
      STAFFING NEEDS BY USING
      AVAILABLE DATA
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.1

The two key variables that FAA uses to project controller staffing
needs are estimates of future air traffic growth and future
controller attrition.  FAA's projections of air traffic growth have
been reasonable.  In fiscal years 1991 through 1995, FAA's estimates
of the amount of air traffic to be handled by certain facilities
differed by between 0.6 and 7.4 percent from the actual levels. 
Since the projections are designed to be accurate within 10 percent,
FAA officials believe that these estimates are accurate enough for
its purposes. 

GAO could not evaluate the reasonableness of FAA's projections for
controller attrition because FAA does not maintain previous
projections that GAO could compare to actual attrition levels. 
However, in examining the process FAA uses to estimate attrition, GAO
found that FAA's projections of retirements--which account for most
attrition--may be overstated.  FAA bases its projections on
assumptions they make about when controllers will be eligible to
retire rather than using available data on actual retirement
eligibility.  GAO found that many controllers may not qualify for
retirement as early as FAA assumes.  In addition, FAA assumes that
the same percentage of controllers will retire in the future as in
the past but does not have a basis for this making this assumption. 

While definitively predicting how many controllers will retire in any
year is nearly impossible, FAA could improve its attrition estimates
by using actual information on the age and service time of recent
retirees and current controllers.  Using data on actual retirements
from fiscal years 1992 through 1996, GAO found that, on average,
controllers retired when they had about 31 years of federal service
and were about 56 years old.  Combining these data with similar data
on current controllers, GAO estimated that retirements could be
significantly lower than FAA projects for fiscal years 1999 through
2002.  For example, while FAA projects that 510 controllers will
retire in fiscal year 2002, data on recent retirees indicate that the
number of retirees in fiscal year 2002 could range from 211 to 273
controllers. 

Because it takes about 3 years to fully train a new controller, if
actual retirements differ significantly from FAA's estimates, it
could take FAA several years to adjust its hiring to reflect actual
retirements.  If FAA overestimates the number of future retirees, it
would have too many controllers for several years, resulting in
increased costs.  If FAA underestimates the number of retirees, it
could be several years before fully trained controllers are
available, which could result in an increase in overtime for the
remaining controllers and, in extreme cases, flight delays due to
decreased levels of FAA operations. 


      SHORT-TERM STAFFING NEEDS
      CAN BE MET, BUT UNCERTAINTY
      EXISTS ABOUT FAA'S ABILITY
      TO MEET LONG-TERM NEEDS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.2

A sufficient number of candidates are available from various sources
to meet FAA's plans to hire 1,300 new controllers in the short term,
fiscal years 1997 and 1998, including former FAA and Department of
Defense controllers as well as graduates from the collegiate program
and the Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium. 

In the long term, however, it is uncertain whether current sources
can provide the new controllers FAA plans to hire during fiscal years
1999 through 2002.  The majority of available candidates are
controllers who were fired from FAA during the 1981 controller
strike.  FAA officials believe that these controllers may only fill
staffing needs in the short term because many of them could retire at
the same time as current controllers.  While data on the age and
service time of the former controllers who qualify for rehire are
available, FAA has not analyzed these data to determine when the
former controllers would become eligible to retire and thus would
need to be replaced. 

To ensure that it has enough controller candidates, FAA is expanding
the number of post-secondary schools participating in the collegiate
and cooperative education programs.  According to FAA officials, the
collegiate program will include 18 additional schools by September
1997. 

FAA intends to provide a portion of initial controller training for
all collegiate program candidates at the FAA Academy in order to
standardize training on the latest equipment and reduce on-the-job
training time and costs.  However, under this approach, FAA will
assume some of the costs of training that many candidates in the
collegiate program are currently paying.  FAA has not analyzed the
cost-effectiveness of changing its approach to training new
controllers. 


      FAA OFFICIALS IDENTIFIED
      IMPEDIMENTS THAT CONTRIBUTE
      TO STAFFING IMBALANCES AT
      ATC FACILITIES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.3

In April 1996, FAA's total controller workforce was 17,163, compared
to the staffing standard of 17,465--a difference of about 2 percent. 
However, when GAO examined staffing at specific ATC facilities, there
was a greater difference between actual staffing and the standards at
about half of the facilities.  Specifically, about 21 percent of ATC
facilities were staffed at levels more than 10 percent above FAA's
standards, while 32 percent of ATC facilities were staffed at levels
more than 10 percent below the standards.  While some differences may
be acceptable because of certain circumstances, such as workload
factors that are unique to particular facilities, FAA headquarters
officials acknowledged that some facilities have too many
controllers, while others have too few. 

FAA regional officials told us that one impediment to alleviating the
staffing imbalances is FAA's practice of waiting until the end of the
fiscal year to distribute funds to relocate controllers among
facilities.  Funds initially designated to move controllers are used
during the year to supplement cost increases for other operating
expenses.  According to FAA regional officials, this practice delays
controller moves, creates uncertainty, and inhibits the timely and
effective allocation of resources within the regions.  FAA
headquarters officials agreed that this practice causes problems but
told GAO that sufficient funds have always been available to pay for
controller moves by the end of the fiscal year. 

A second impediment, according to regional officials, is that they
have limited authority to hire new controllers from their geographic
areas.  FAA headquarters officials agreed and explained that they
currently require that most new controllers come from two pools of
candidates--the controllers who were fired in 1981 or graduates of
the collegiate program--regardless of the candidates' geographic
preferences.  This often requires new controllers to move in order to
get hired.  Once hired, many new controllers request transfers to
other more desirable facilities.  More local recruiting, FAA
officials explained, would help reduce the number of controller
transfers and resignations, particularly at facilities that are hard
to staff, because newly hired controllers would begin working in
their preferred geographic areas. 

A third impediment, cited by officials in all FAA regions, is limited
hiring in recent years because of budget constraints, which has
resulted in fewer new controllers being assigned to some ATC
facilities.  Regional officials told us that new controllers are
needed to fill vacancies created by attrition, as well as to provide
a buffer against future retirements.  According to these officials,
an inability to fill vacancies has led to increased overtime and
reduced controller training at some facilities. 

While FAA is proposing a variety of initiatives to address its
staffing problems--including more regional recruiting and hiring, and
instituting an interim incentive pay program for hard-to-staff
facilities--it is too soon to determine their effectiveness. 


   RECOMMENDATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:5

To improve FAA's process for estimating and meeting future controller
staffing needs, GAO recommends that the Secretary of Transportation
direct the Administrator of FAA to (1) incorporate actual information
on the age, years of service, and retirement eligibility date of
current controllers into its projections of future controller
retirements; (2) use age and service data to determine when
controllers fired in 1981 and rehired could retire and therefore
would need to be replaced; and (3) monitor the costs of training for
collegiate program graduates hired in fiscal years 1997 and 1998 to
determine whether anticipated savings will be realized under the
revised training program. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:6

We provided copies of a draft of this report to FAA for its review
and comment.  FAA officials, including the Acting Deputy Associate
Administrator for Air Traffic Services, concurred with our
recommendations and provided clarifying comments which have been
incorporated as appropriate. 


INTRODUCTION
============================================================ Chapter 1

Each year, over 18,000 aircraft and more than 500 million passengers
travel through the air transportation system in the United States. 
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has responsibility for
managing this system and ensuring the safe and efficient movement of
air traffic.  To successfully accomplish this mission, FAA must have
a sufficient number of adequately trained air traffic controllers
working at air traffic control (ATC) facilities.  Currently, FAA
operates nearly 400 ATC facilities and employs over 17,000
individuals in its controller workforce.\1

For nearly a decade after the air traffic controller strike in August
1981, FAA had to rebuild its controller workforce.  Between fiscal
years 1982 and 1990, FAA hired thousands of controllers to replace
those fired by a presidential directive in 1981 and indefinitely
barred from seeking future employment as FAA controllers.  Most
controllers hired during that period have remained with FAA.  In
August 1993, the bar was repealed through a presidential memorandum,
and in 1995, FAA began rehiring some of the former controllers.  FAA
anticipates that a large number of these controllers, in addition to
the controllers who did not participate in the strike and controllers
hired after the strike, will become eligible to retire beginning in
the early 2000s, when they first meet minimum retirement
qualifications. 


--------------------
\1 The controller workforce comprises about 14,500 ATC specialists
(controllers), 2,000 first-line supervisors, and 560 air traffic
management coordinators. 


   ROLE OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS
   IN THE U.S.  AIR TRANSPORTATION
   SYSTEM
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1

Air traffic controllers play a critical role in the nation's air
transportation system.  Specifically, controllers are responsible for
ensuring the safe, orderly, and expeditious flow of air traffic in
the air and on the ground.  Controllers manage air traffic visually
and through the use of various types of equipment, such as radars and
computers, at various ATC facilities--control towers, terminal radar
approach control (TRACON) facilities,\2 and air route traffic control
centers (commonly called "en route centers"). 

Controllers' responsibilities for managing air traffic vary according
to the type of ATC facility.  For instance, controllers that work at
control towers are responsible for ensuring the safe separation of
aircraft on the ground and in flight in the vicinity of airports,
generally within a 5-mile radius.  These controllers manage the flow
of aircraft during takeoffs and landings and coordinate the transfer
of aircraft with adjacent ATC facilities as aircraft enter or leave
an airport's airspace.  Controllers working at TRACON facilities
manage the arrival and departure of aircraft within a 5- to 30-mile
radius of airports.  Controllers working at en route centers manage
aircraft beyond a 30-mile radius.  These controllers assign aircraft
to specific routes and altitudes to separate aircraft while they are
flying along federal airways or when operating into or out of
airports not served by a terminal facility.  These controllers also
coordinate the transfer of aircraft control with adjacent en route
centers or terminal facilities.  The typical en route center has
responsibility for more than 100,000 square miles of airspace, which
generally extends over several states.  Depending on the location of
the en route center, some controllers manage domestic, international,
and oceanic air traffic.  Figure 1.1 shows how controllers working at
the different ATC facilities track aircraft during ground, take off,
landing, and in-flight operations.  As of April 10, 1996, FAA
operated 387 ATC facilities, consisting of 24 en route centers and
363 terminal facilities. 

   Figure 1.1:  Aircraft Tracking
   at ATC Facilities

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

FAA determines the appropriate level of staffing for its ATC
facilities by using staffing standards forecast models.  These models
produce staffing standards--the specified level of controller staff
needed to manage the ATC system, within 10 percent.  For example, the
staffing standards indicated in fiscal year 1996 that there should
have been 17,465 controllers in the controller workforce.  The
standards also specified staffing levels for each ATC facility, but
according to FAA officials, the facility-level standards are not
designed to be as accurate as the national standards. 


--------------------
\2 FAA classifies TRACON facilities and control towers as terminal
facilities.  Therefore, to maintain consistency, we use this term
when referring to ATC facilities in this report. 


   AVAILABLE CONTROLLER CANDIDATES
   AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
   TRAINING
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2

FAA relies on a number of sources to fill its controller positions. 
These sources are (1) individuals with no prior controller training
or work experience in the ATC environment, (2) individuals who have
received some controller training but generally do not have work
experience in the federal ATC environment, and (3) individuals with
prior controller work experience. 

The first group includes individuals who respond to vacancy
announcements for controller positions.  The second group includes
graduates of the collegiate training initiative (CTI) program, who
received initial ATC academic and technical skills training prior to
being hired by FAA as controllers.\3 This type of training introduces
the students to the terminology, airspace configurations, and
technical skills necessary to manage air traffic and operate
equipment.  The third group includes former controllers fired in
1981, who were members of the Professional Air Traffic Controller
Organization (PATCO) union; former controllers who left FAA
voluntarily and are eligible for reinstatement; and former Department
of Defense (DOD) civilian and military controllers. 

Controller candidates who have no prior controller training or work
experience had received initial controller training at the FAA
Academy in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.\4 However, FAA discontinued
initial controller training for newly hired controllers at the
Academy in 1992 due to a sharp decrease in controller hiring. 

Candidates who currently receive initial controller training through
the CTI program are trained at one of four CTI schools located in
various parts of the country.  These schools are the Community
College of Beaver County in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania; Hampton
University in Hampton, Virginia; University of North Dakota in Grand
Forks, North Dakota; and University of Alaska-Anchorage in Anchorage,
Alaska.  The type, length, and cost of controller training provided
by the CTI schools vary, and students pay the cost of their training
at all these schools.  In addition, in 1989 the Congress established
the Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium (MARC) in Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, to train controller candidates.  Unlike the CTI schools,
the MARC program is not part of a broader academic program, and the
cost of training MARC students is paid by federal funds. 

Controller candidates with prior controller work experience, such as
former PATCO members and former DOD controllers, are not required to
repeat the initial controller training when hired by FAA.  However,
they must complete certain refresher courses at the FAA Academy. 

Once assigned to an ATC facility, controllers are classified as
"developmental controllers" until they complete all requirements to
be certified for all of the ATC positions within a defined area of a
given ATC facility.  It generally takes new controllers who have had
only initial controller training 2 to 4 years--depending on the
availability of facility staff or contractors to provide on-the-job
training--to complete all the certification requirements to become
full-performance-level (FPL) controllers.  It normally takes
individuals who have prior controller experience 1 to 2 years to
become FPL controllers. 


--------------------
\3 In January 1991, FAA established the CTI program to test whether
postsecondary educational institutions could provide and validate
controller training and screening.  This program was intended to
supplement FAA's controller training program. 

\4 The FAA Academy in Oklahoma City provides management and technical
training to controllers, inspectors, and other FAA personnel. 


   THE TWO SETS OF RETIREMENT
   RULES THAT AFFECT CONTROLLERS'
   ELIGIBILITY FOR RETIREMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3

Controllers working at FAA's ATC facilities are eligible to retire
under two sets of retirement rules--the general retirement rules for
federal employees and special rules for controllers only.  Depending
on when they were hired, controllers are covered by either the Civil
Service Retirement System (CSRS) or the Federal Employee Retirement
System (FERS).  Under these rules, controllers can retire if they
meet certain age and years-of-service requirements.  For example, a
controller who is 55 years old can retire after 30 years of federal
service.  Under the special controller retirement rules, controllers
may be able to retire earlier than under the general CSRS and FERS
rules if they have enough service time as an active controller or
immediate supervisor.  For instance, controllers can retire at age 50
if they have spent at least 20 years as an active civilian controller
or immediate supervisor or at any age if they have spent at least 25
years as an active civilian controller or immediate supervisor. 
Table 1.1 summarizes all of these rules. 



                               Table 1.1
                
                    Retirement Eligibility Rules for
                              Controllers

Type of retirement                             Age    Years of service
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
CSRS (applicable for most                       62                   5
 federal employees hired
 before 1984)
                                                60                  20
                                                55                  30
FERS (applicable for most                       62                   5
 federal employees hired in or
 after 1984)
                                                60                  20
                                        55 to 57\a                  30
Special controller retirement                   50                  20
 under either CSRS or FERS
 (service time must be as an
 active controller or
 immediate supervisor)
                                               any                  25
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Retirement eligibility under FERS is subject to a minimum
retirement age that differs depending on the birth date of the
employee. 

Source:  Office of Personnel Management's publications. 


   OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND
   METHODOLOGY
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:4

In March 1996, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Transportation, House Committee on Appropriations, and Ranking Member
of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, asked us
to examine FAA's efforts for addressing future and existing
controller staffing needs.  Specifically, we were asked to (1)
identify the key variables FAA uses to project future controller
staffing needs and evaluate their reasonableness, (2) determine
whether FAA has identified a sufficient number of controller
candidates to satisfy its short- and long-term controller staffing
needs and evaluate FAA's plans to train new controllers, and (3)
identify impediments that hinder FAA from staffing ATC facilities at
specified levels. 

To address the first objective, we interviewed officials in FAA's
Office of Air Traffic Resource Management, Office of Human Resources
Management, and Office of Business Information and Consultation who
are responsible for managing the controller workforce and preparing
the staffing standards models.  These officials provided information
on the data used to support FAA's staffing requests, including FAA's
projections of air traffic and attrition, which we compared to
available data on actual traffic and attrition.  We also used
personnel data supplied by FAA to estimate the age and service
characteristics of future retirees on the basis of characteristics of
actual retirees between fiscal years 1992 and 1996.  Additional
information on how we made these projections is in appendix I.  We
did not, however, verify the validity of the staffing estimates
generated by the staffing standards forecast models because the
National Research Council--which is the principal operating agency of
the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Engineering--was reviewing FAA's methodologies for estimating the
number of controllers needed at ATC facilities.  However, the Council
was not reviewing the part of the models that estimates future
attrition.  Furthermore, the Council expects to issue a final report
in the spring of 1997. 

To address the second objective, we interviewed officials at the FAA
Academy in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, the MARC, and the four CTI
schools to obtain information on the number of controller candidates
trained at those facilities during fiscal years 1993 to 1996 and the
annual capacity of these facilities to train new controllers.  We
also interviewed FAA headquarters officials and analyzed pertinent
data to determine (1) what was the pool of controller candidates
available to meet anticipated staffing needs, (2) whether FAA had
developed plans to satisfy long-term staffing needs, and (3) what
actions FAA had under way to expand the pool of available controller
candidates. 

To address the third objective, we compared controller staffing
levels specified by FAA's controller staffing standards with actual
staffing at the national, regional, and facility levels as of April
10, 1996.  We also reviewed pertinent documents and interviewed
officials in FAA's Air Traffic Resource Management Office and the
National Air Traffic Controller Association (NATCA) in Washington,
D.C. 

To obtain a nationwide perspective on controller staffing issues, we
sent a survey to, followed by a semistructured telephone interview
with, air traffic managers at the nine FAA regional offices.  In
addition, we sent the same survey to air traffic managers at 15 ATC
facilities (see app.  II), including 3 en route centers, and at 12
terminals, as well as NATCA representatives located at the Eastern,
Great Lakes, and Southern regions to obtain their perspectives on (1)
their staffing needs as compared to current controller staffing
levels and the impact of these differences on controller operations,
(2) the impediments or principal causes of staffing differences at
ATC facilities, and (3) the initiatives FAA has under way to address
the impediments.  We selected a judgmental sample of 15 ATC
facilities to obtain geographical diversity and a representative mix
of facilities where the current controller staffing levels were
greater or less than the 10-percent difference acceptable to FAA. 
The three NATCA regions were selected because all 15 ATC facilities
that we contacted were located in these regions. 

We conducted our review from April 1996 through February 1997 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

We provided copies of a draft of this report to FAA for its review
and comment.  FAA officials, including the Acting Deputy Associate
Administrator for Air Traffic Services, commented on the report, and
changes in response to their comments are contained throughout the
report. 


FAA COULD IMPROVE THE ACCURACY OF
ITS FORECASTS OF CONTROLLER
STAFFING NEEDS BY USING AVAILABLE
DATA
============================================================ Chapter 2

FAA's projections of future controller staffing needs are primarily
based on its staffing standards forecast models that use two key
variables to forecast future needs--estimates of future air traffic
growth and estimates of future controller attrition.  While the air
traffic estimates have been reasonable, FAA could not provide data
needed to evaluate its attrition estimates.  FAA's attrition
estimates could overstate retirements in future years because the
agency has not compiled some of the information needed to determine
when controllers will be eligible to retire and because it does not
consider available data on controllers' age and service time in its
attrition estimates.  By analyzing such data, we found that
controller retirements could be significantly lower than FAA projects
beginning in 1999. 


   CONTROLLER STAFFING NEEDS ARE
   BASED ON STAFFING STANDARDS
   FORECAST MODELS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1

Historically, FAA has based its staffing requests on its
long-standing staffing standards forecast models--it uses separate
models for en route centers, TRACON facilities, and control towers. 
The models forecast the number of controllers that will be needed by
using three types of data: 

  -- periodic industrial engineering studies that measure the amount
     of time it takes a controller to perform necessary work tasks,
     such as assigning an airplane to a new altitude;

  -- estimates of changes in air traffic activity; and

  -- estimates of future controller attrition. 

According to FAA officials, the staffing standards process undergoes
periodic revision to update data and improve methodologies.  As a
result of these updates, FAA's estimate of the total number of
controllers it needs can change from year to year. 

According to FAA officials, its models have been used to estimate
controller staffing needs at ATC facilities nationwide, plus or minus
10 percent, and have served as key components for formulating FAA's
annual budget.  Before being submitted to the Congress, the staffing
budget is reviewed within FAA, as well as by the Department of
Transportation and by the Office of Management and Budget. 

The size of the controller workforce grew each fiscal year from 1981
through 1992, when it reached 17,982 controllers.  In fiscal year
1991, the last full year in which FAA offered initial training only
at its Academy in Oklahoma City, FAA hired a total of 1,235 new
controller candidates.  Subsequently, FAA's hiring of new controllers
decreased significantly because it had more controllers than
specified by the staffing standards.  Between fiscal years 1993 and
1996, FAA hired a total of 611 new controllers--fewer than the 1,513
who had left the controller workforce over the same period--resulting
in a decrease in the size of the controller workforce (see fig.  2.1
and table 2.1).  According to FAA officials, most of the decrease in
the size of the controller workforce was due to the congressionally
directed initiative to contract out the functions of lower-level
control towers to private companies, instead of staffing them with
FAA employees.  As part of a larger presidential effort to reduce the
number of federal employees, in 1994 FAA also offered a retirement
incentive, called a buyout, to staff, including those controllers who
worked at the towers whose functions were contracted out.  In fiscal
year 1995, FAA's end-of-year controller workforce dropped below the
level specified by the staffing standards.  Although the actual
controller workforce differed from the staffing standards by as much
as 400 in some years, nationwide staffing levels were well within the
standards' 10-percent tolerance level. 

   Figure 2.1:  FAA's Controller
   Workforce Compared to the
   Staffing Standards, Fiscal
   Years 1993-96

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  FAA's data. 



                               Table 2.1
                
                FAA's Controller Workforce, Fiscal Years
                                1993-96

Fiscal year                               1993    1994    1995    1996
--------------------------------------  ------  ------  ------  ------
Start-of-year controller workforce      17,982  17,688  17,544  17,322
Workforce specified by the staffing     17,327  17,329  17,535  17,486
 standards
Newly hired controllers                    220     134     157     100
Attrition                                  514     278     379     342
End-of-year controller workforce        17,688  17,544  17,322  17,080
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA's Air Traffic Staffing Plan and Staffing Standards. 

This report does not evaluate FAA's staffing standards.  We have
previously reported on FAA's staffing standards, and FAA has taken
action to address our prior recommendations.\1 In addition, the
standards process is currently undergoing a congressionally requested
review by an expert panel convened by the National Academy of
Sciences.  The study was requested to determine if a comprehensive
methodology could be developed to provide more accurate estimates of
the required number of controllers at each ATC facility, and its
findings are expected to be published in the spring of 1997. 


--------------------
\1 See FAA Staffing:  Improvements Needed in Estimating Air Traffic
Controller Requirements (GAO/RCED-88-106, June 21, 1988). 


   FAA'S RECENT STAFFING REQUESTS
   REFLECT ITS ESTIMATES OF
   INCREASED CONTROLLER ATTRITION
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2

After the controller workforce dropped below the levels specified by
the standards in 1995, FAA initiated plans to increase hiring.  FAA
currently plans to increase both hiring and the overall size of the
controller workforce over the next 4 years.  In fiscal year 1997, FAA
requested and received funds to hire 500 new controllers--250 to
replace controllers expected to leave the workforce that year and 250
to meet projected future needs.  FAA's fiscal year 1998 request
includes funds for 800 new controllers--300 replacements and 500 new
positions.  Table 2.2 provides FAA's estimates of controller hiring,
attrition, and the total workforce through fiscal year 2002.  As the
table shows, estimated attrition is expected to increase from 280
controllers in fiscal year 1997 to 550 controllers in fiscal year
2002. 



                               Table 2.2
                
                 FAA's Estimates of Controller Hiring,
                  Attrition, and the Total Controller
                   Workforce, Fiscal Years 1997-2002

                        Start-
                           of-                       End-of-
                          year                          year
                      controll            Estimate  controll
                            er   Planned         d        er
                      workforc       new  attritio  workforc       Net
Fiscal year                  e     hires         n         e    change
--------------------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------
1997                    17,080       500       280    17,300      +220
1998                    17,300       800       300    17,800      +500
1999                    17,800       650       400    18,050      +250
2000                    18,050       700       450    18,300      +250
2001                    18,300       350       500    18,150      -150
2002                    18,150       422       550    18,022      -128
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA's Air Traffic Staffing Plan. 

According to officials at FAA headquarters, the attrition estimates
that support its recent staffing requests are based in part on the
staffing standards forecast models and in part on another method that
is intended to address an anticipated increase in the number of
controllers eligible to retire.  This second method is based on FAA's
assumption that 20 percent of those who are eligible to retire will
do so each year.  According to FAA officials, because many
controllers hired after the 1981 PATCO strike will first be eligible
to retire around fiscal year 2001, they expect more controllers to
retire each year as more become eligible.  Figure 2.2 shows FAA's
estimates of the number of controllers who will become eligible to
retire each year though fiscal year 2007, as well as the estimated
size of the total pool of those eligible to retire each year through
fiscal year 2002, the last year of FAA's controller staffing plan. 
However, FAA officials were not able to specify how much of the
estimated increase in attrition is predicted by the staffing
standards forecast models and how much is derived from its estimate
of future retirements. 

   Figure 2.2:  FAA's Estimates of
   the Number of Controllers
   Eligible for Retirement, Fiscal
   Years 1997-2007

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  FAA's data. 

In addition to reflecting changes in the number of controllers
eligible to retire, FAA's staffing plan also differs from the annual
staffing levels projected by the staffing standards in several other
ways.  First, the plan anticipates hiring replacements 3 years before
they are needed to provide them with adequate training.  In this way,
FAA will have fully trained replacements for those who retire. 
According to FAA officials, the plan also reflects an effort to
spread out hiring over several years to reduce the training burden on
its Academy and ATC facilities.  Thus, because FAA's staffing plan is
designed to hire enough controllers to be at the level specified by
the standards in fiscal year 2002, controller staffing is expected to
again be above the standards in fiscal years 1998-2001. 

Officials we interviewed in eight of FAA's nine regions expressed
concerns about the adequacy of the future controller workforce that
were similar to those expressed by headquarters officials.  The
regional officials were concerned about an increase in attrition in
the coming years due to the pending retirement eligibility of those
controllers who did not strike, those hired after 1981, and former
PATCO members who have been rehired by FAA.  Many of these officials
also emphasized that FAA needs an adequate supply of new controllers
to provide time to train replacements for those who retire. 


   WORKLOAD ESTIMATES ARE
   REASONABLE, BUT ATTRITION
   ESTIMATES MAY OVERSTATE FUTURE
   RETIREMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:3

The first key variable FAA uses to project future controller staffing
needs is an estimate of the growth in the volume of air traffic,
which FAA's Office of Aviation Policy and Plans derives from a model
that includes several measures of overall economic activity (e.g.,
the consumer price index) and aviation-specific statistics, as well
as expert opinions on future trends.  These estimates have been
closer to actual traffic levels in the short term than over longer
periods.  For example, between fiscal years 1992 and 1995, the
estimates of activity at en route centers that were made 1 year
earlier came, on average, within 1 percent of the actual level of
activity.  The estimates made 4 years earlier were, on average, 7.4
percent higher than the actual level (see table 2.3).  According to
FAA officials, these estimates are reasonable because they fall
within the 10-percent tolerance level of its models. 



                               Table 2.3
                
                Actual and Predicted Levels of En Route
                Center Activity in Millions of Aircraft
                     Handled, Fiscal Years 1991-95

                                                               Average
                                                            percentage
                                                            difference
                                                               between
                                                            actual and
                                                             projected
Fiscal year                   1991  1992  1993  1994  1995      levels
----------------------------  ----  ----  ----  ----  ----  ----------
Actual level                  36.2  37.2  37.6  38.9  40.2
Level predicted 1 year        38.5  37.3  37.5  37.9  39.8       0.6 %
 earlier
Level predicted 2 years       39.1  39.6  38.3  38.4  38.6       2.2 %
 earlier
Level predicted 3 years       39.7  40.1  40.6  39.4  39.3       4.9 %
 earlier
Level predicted 4 years       40.3  40.8  41.0  41.5  40.3       7.4 %
 earlier
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA's Aviation Forecasts, fiscal years 1996-2007. 

In addition to estimates of future workload, FAA's staffing standards
forecast models use projections of future attrition to determine
controller staffing needs.  These projections, called pipeline
models, are based on actual experience over a recent 3-year period. 
FAA looks at who entered and left the controller workforce through
several methods, such as retirement or resignation, promotion, or
moving to or from a staff position.  Using 3 years of data on actual
movements, FAA determines what percentage of controllers entered or
left the workforce by each method, then projects that percentage to
future years.  For example, in fiscal year 1995, 114 of 6,432
controllers at en route centers (or 1.8 percent) retired or resigned. 
By performing the same comparison for fiscal years 1993 through 1995
and averaging the results, FAA determined that on average 1.69
percent of the controllers at en route centers retired or resigned
during that period.  FAA then used this percentage to project future
retirements or resignations of controllers at its en route centers. 
By using similar calculations for all types of controller movements
to estimate the net gain or loss of controllers, FAA annually
determines how many new controllers need to enter the training
pipeline as replacements.  FAA uses a separate model that uses
similar variables to estimate the pipeline needs of its TRACON
facilities and control towers.  FAA's two pipeline models are
currently based on actual changes in its controller workforce during
fiscal years 1993 through 1995 and are used to forecast the workforce
needed for fiscal years 1996 through 2006. 

While the pipeline models include estimates of the number of
controllers who leave the workforce to take staff positions or return
from such positions each year, according to agency officials, the
number of controllers leaving to take such positions has roughly
equalled the number of controllers returning, so there has been
little net impact on the overall size of the controller workforce. 
Also, agency officials estimate that the number of controllers
resigning from the workforce without qualifying for retirement will
remain steady at about 40 controllers per year.  As a result,
although the models forecast attrition from all sources, the
forecasts for new controllers are primarily the result of retirement
estimates. 

We asked FAA for previous versions of its pipeline models so we could
compare attrition estimates made by earlier models to actual data
from recent years.  Because FAA does not maintain copies of the
models from previous years, officials could not provide us with
attrition estimates for years prior to fiscal year 1995.  However,
FAA did provide copies of the models used to project attrition for
fiscal year 1995.  Table 2.4 shows that 20 more controllers retired
or resigned in fiscal year 1995 than projected by the terminal and en
route center models.  Without data from earlier years, however, we
were not able to evaluate the reasonableness of the attrition
estimates produced by FAA's previous pipeline models. 



                               Table 2.4
                
                 FAA's Estimates and Actual Controller
                  Retirements and Resignations, Fiscal
                               Year 1995

                                                                Actual
                                                             attrition
                                                                  as a
                         Projected      Actual              percentage
                        retirement  retirement                of total
Type of facility                 s           s  Difference   workforce
----------------------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------
Terminal (TRACON and           129         145          16        1.8%
 tower)
En route center                110         114           4        1.7%
======================================================================
Total                          239         259          20        1.7%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA's 1995 and 1996 pipeline models. 


   FIVE FACTORS LIMIT THE
   REASONABLENESS OF FAA'S
   PROJECTIONS OF LONG-TERM
   CONTROLLER NEEDS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4

Because the actual rate at which controllers retire depends on the
decisions of thousands of individual controllers, definitively
predicting how many controllers will actually retire in any year is
impossible.  Most controllers hired under FERS are required to retire
from actively controlling air traffic when they first become
eligible, if they are at least 56.  In contrast, most controllers
hired under CSRS are not subject to mandatory retirement rules,
unless hired after 1972.\2 According to FAA officials, if a
controller is not subject to mandatory retirement, such
considerations as the state of the economy and the family status of
the controller can affect the controller's decision about whether to
continue working after becoming eligible to retire.  Because such
considerations are not within FAA's control, either a greater or
lesser number of controllers could retire than forecast.  If
attrition estimates are too high, FAA could hire too many
controllers, unnecessarily increasing the cost of operating the
nation's ATC system.  If attrition estimates are too low, FAA could
have fewer controllers than needed, causing an unanticipated increase
in the use of overtime and, in extreme cases, flight delays to ensure
that the safety of the ATC system would not be compromised. 

Despite the difficulty of accurately predicting future needs, FAA has
to estimate these needs to justify its budget requests for staffing
and equipment.  Without accurate projections of controller staffing
levels and retirements, FAA cannot hire sufficient replacements and
provide them with the 2 to 4 years of training needed to achieve full
performance level.  However, five aspects of the way FAA determines
its projections of future staffing needs raise questions about the
reasonableness of projections in future years. 


--------------------
\2 Under both systems, the President and the Secretary of
Transportation have the authority, under certain circumstances, to
waive mandatory retirement up to age 61 for individual controllers. 


      PERCENTAGE OF CONTROLLERS
      ELIGIBLE TO RETIRE IS
      EXPECTED TO CHANGE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4.1

FAA's practice of estimating attrition as a fixed percentage of the
controller workforce may not accurately reflect future attrition
because the agency expects to experience a significant increase in
the number of controllers becoming eligible to retire in the next
several years.  For example, between fiscal years 1995 and 2000, FAA
estimates that the number of controllers who will become eligible for
retirement each year will remain relatively constant at about 330 to
440.  However, FAA also estimates that in fiscal year 2001, the
number eligible to retire will increase to 522 controllers, in fiscal
year 2002 to 841 controllers, and in fiscal year 2007 to 1,361
controllers.  Should these estimates prove correct and more
controllers become eligible to retire, it is likely that more
controllers will exercise their option to retire.  Since retirements
account for most controller attrition, it is possible that the
percentage of controllers who actually leave the workforce will be
different than was experienced in fiscal years 1993 through 1995. 


      ATTRITION ESTIMATES COULD BE
      INFLATED BY DATA FROM BUYOUT
      IN 1994
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4.2

The staffing standards forecast models estimate future attrition
according to data on actual attrition during fiscal years 1993
through 1995.  However, during fiscal 1994, 139 of the 510
controllers who retired voluntarily took the buyout previously
described.  Most of these controllers worked at level-1 towers, which
were being contracted out to the private sector.  Because FAA does
not plan to offer buyouts for controllers in the future, including
the departure of these controllers in estimates of future retirements
could inflate future attrition estimates. 


      CHANGES IN THE WORKFORCE
      COULD AFFECT RETIREMENT
      RATES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4.3

Several of the regional FAA and NATCA officials we interviewed
questioned the reliability of using data on past retirees to predict
future retirement, as FAA's staffing standards forecast models do. 
These officials indicated that recent changes in the workforce,
including an increased workload, a better educated workforce, and the
establishment of mandatory retirement rules, suggest that controllers
who are working today may not retire at the same rate as past
retirees.  For example, these officials noted that because
controllers with a college education could have more options for
post-FAA employment, they could be more likely to retire early. 


      FAA'S MODELS DO NOT ESTIMATE
      THE IMPACT OF FUTURE CHANGES
      IN TECHNOLOGY OR POLICY
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4.4

FAA's staffing standards forecast models do not consider future
changes in FAA's technology or policy.  For example, FAA is currently
purchasing new ATC equipment and developing a plan to allow for "free
flight," or the ability of pilots to set their own flight path in
certain areas.  There was no consensus, however, among the FAA
regional and headquarters officials that we spoke with on the impact
of these changes.  While some believe the changes will only increase
the reliability of the air traffic system, others believed there will
be a long-term increase in productivity, resulting in a need for
fewer controllers in the future.  Others anticipate a short-term
decrease in productivity while controllers learn to use the new
equipment.  In addition, FAA is finalizing changes to its training
program (see ch.  3) that could reduce the training burden on local
ATC facilities.  To the extent that current controllers and
supervisors are used to provide on-the-job-training for newly hired
controllers, these changes could allow the facilities to use more
staff to control traffic.  Because these changes are still being
developed, FAA has no way to quantify their impact on controller
workload.  However, if FAA continues to estimate future needs by
looking at past performance without regard for planned changes, it
will not be able to take advantage of the increased efficiency those
changes could deliver until several years after they are implemented. 


      FAA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA
      ON WHEN CONTROLLERS WILL BE
      ELIGIBLE TO RETIRE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4.5

As discussed earlier, FAA's hiring plan for controllers is based on
two main factors--the staffing standards forecast models and an
adjustment to account for an increase in the number of controllers
eligible to retire.  However, the accuracy of FAA's estimates of
controller retirements may be limited because FAA has not determined
exactly when each controller can become eligible to retire, because
of a lack of easy access to data on controllers' work history. 
Specifically, FAA estimates, on the basis of past retirement rates,
that future retirements will equal about 20 percent of those
controllers eligible to retire each year.  Figure 2.3 shows FAA's
estimates of the number of controllers who will become eligible to
retire each year, as well as the number expected to retire though
fiscal year 2002, the last year of FAA's current staffing plan.\3
This figure illustrates FAA's position that the number of retirees
will increase as the number of those eligible increases. 

   Figure 2.3:  FAA's Estimates of
   the Number of Controllers
   Becoming Eligible to Retire
   Compared to Those Projected to
   Retire, Fiscal Years 1997-2006

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's data and GAO's
   analysis of FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

While it is logical to conclude that more people would retire if more
became eligible, the accuracy of FAA's projections is limited because
the agency has not compiled the data necessary to determine when each
controller will be eligible for special controller retirement.  While
FAA can determine when an individual controller will be eligible to
retire, the information is not currently stored in a way in which it
could be used to determine the retirement eligibility of FAA's entire
controller workforce.  Instead of actual retirement eligibility data,
FAA has based its estimates of future retirements on the assumption
that all controllers spend their entire career as active controllers. 
For example, FAA has assumed that all controllers who are at least 50
years old and have worked for FAA for at least 20 years would be
eligible to retire.  While this assumption could prove true in many
cases, data from FAA's pipeline models have indicated that more than
1,300 controllers moved between the controller workforce and staff
positions each year between 1993 and 1995.  Because many controllers
spend at least some time in staff positions where they do not
actively control traffic, the date on which they become eligible for
special controller retirement may be later than the one FAA has used
in its estimates.  As a result, they could retire later than FAA has
anticipated. 


--------------------
\3 FAA's retirement estimates differ by 40 controllers from its total
attrition estimates to account for the number of controllers
estimated to permanently leave the workforce every year for reasons
other than retirement.  FAA estimates that this rate will remain
fairly constant through fiscal year 2002. 


   DATA ON THE AGE AND SERVICE
   TIME OF RECENTLY RETIRED
   CONTROLLERS INDICATE THAT FEWER
   CONTROLLERS COULD RETIRE IN
   FUTURE YEARS THAN FAA HAS
   FORECAST
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:5

Rather than estimating future retirements on the basis of assumptions
about who will be eligible to retire, FAA could use actual
information on the age and service time of those controllers who
retired in recent years, as well as current controllers, to predict
future retirements.  Using data provided by FAA, we conducted such an
analysis and found that, on average, controllers could retire later
than projected by FAA's fiscal year 1999 through 2002 staffing plan. 

The simplest way to use recent experience to estimate future
retirements is to apply the average age and service time of recent
retirees to those controllers currently working for FAA.  Using this
approach, we found that, on average, controllers who retired in
fiscal years 1992 through 1996 had about 31 years of federal service. 
Fewer than 15 percent retired with 25 years of federal service or
less, one of the requirements for special controller retirement.  As
figure 2.4 shows, should current controllers not retire until they
have earned 31 years of federal service, the number of retirees will
be much lower than FAA has projected for each year between fiscal
years 1998 and 2002.  In fact, while FAA expects 510 controllers to
retire in fiscal year 2002, the first year in which at least 510
current controllers reach 31 years of federal service is fiscal year
2008. 

   Figure 2.4:  FAA's Retirement
   Projections Compared to the
   Annual Number of Controllers
   Reaching 31 Years of Federal
   Service, Fiscal Years 1997-2011

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's projections and
   GAO's analysis of FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Next, we looked at the age of the controllers who retired during the
past 5 years and found that their average age was about 56.  This age
is also significant because federal law mandates that most
controllers hired under FERS and controllers hired under CSRS after
1972 retire from actively controlling air traffic at age 56 unless
granted an exemption.  As figure 2.5 shows, the number of controllers
who will turn 56 is lower than the number FAA expects to retire each
year between fiscal years 1997 and 2002.  The first year in which at
least 510 current controllers turn 56 is fiscal year 2009. 

   Figure 2.5:  FAA's Retirement
   Projections Compared to the
   Annual Number of Controllers
   Reaching 56 Years of Age,
   Fiscal Years 1997-2011

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's projections and
   GAO's analysis of FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

While using data on either the age or the service time of current
controllers can illustrate changes in the characteristics of future
retirees, it is preferable to base estimates of future retirements on
both variables because future retirees must meet both age and service
criteria.  According to the official responsible for FAA's staffing
standards forecast models, such an analysis would project future
retirements more accurately than the current staffing standards
models.  However, such an analysis is also more complicated.  To
illustrate the combined effect of the age and service of current
controllers, we developed a probability model based on both factors
to project when each current controller would be likely to retire. 
Figure 2.6 compares FAA's retirement projections with our model's
projections for fiscal years 1997 through 2011.  For each fiscal year
between 1999 and 2002, our model projects that at least 100 fewer
controllers will retire than FAA estimates.  Using this model, the
number of estimated retirees does not exceed 510 controllers until
fiscal year 2008.  Appendix I explains the model in more detail and
contains additional data. 

   Figure 2.6:  FAA's Retirement
   Projections Compared to
   Retirement Projections Based on
   Controllers' Age and Years of
   Federal Service, Fiscal Years
   1997-2011

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's projections and
   GAO's analysis of FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Table 2.5 compares the number of controller retirements FAA has
projected with projections based on age, service time, and a
combination of both.  As this table shows, while FAA's estimated
levels of retirements are close to those calculated using the age and
service data in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, the difference between
the number of potential retirements under FAA's assumptions and the
projections derived from the age and service data is greater in later
fiscal years. 



                                        Table 2.5
                         
                          Projections of Controller Retirements
                           According to FAA's Staffing Plan and
                         Those Derived From Age and Service Data,
                                  Fiscal Years 1997-2002

                                                              Estimate of        Range of
                                                               controller     differences
                      FAA's     Controllers                   retirements   between FAA's
                estimate of   with 31 years   Controllers    based on age    estimate and
                 controller      of federal   reaching 56     and service           other
Fiscal year     retirements         service  years of age            time       estimates
-------------  ------------  --------------  ------------  --------------  --------------
1997                    240             267            96             198       27 to 144
1998                    260             209           139             211       49 to 121
1999                    360             181           169             214      146 to 191
2000                    410             198           192             237      173 to 218
2001                    460             290           199             270      170 to 261
2002                    510             237           261             299      211 to 273
=========================================================================================
Total                  2240            1382          1056            1429
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA's Staffing Plan and GAO's analysis of FAA's data. 

FAA officials said that the accuracy of the agency's retirement
estimates is not a significant issue because the agency monitors
retirements monthly and can hire more or fewer controllers as needed
in future years should its predictions prove inaccurate.  However,
while FAA can adjust its hiring plans annually to ensure that the
actual controller workforce remains equal to the levels specified by
its standards, that does not eliminate the need for accurate
projections because of the time needed to fully train a new
controller.  FAA tries to hire new controllers about 3 years before
the retirement of those they are intended to replace.  As a result,
while adjusting hiring to reflect actual retirements each year can
ensure that FAA has the correct number of controllers in its
workforce, this approach will not ensure that FAA has an adequate
number of fully trained controllers. 

While we do not question the need for FAA to hire enough controllers
to safely operate our nation's ATC system in the current budget
cycle, we are concerned that, should future controller retirements
more closely follow the projections derived from FAA's data on
controllers' age and service time, the agency could hire too many
controllers in later years.  Should fewer controllers retire than FAA
has forecast, this would in effect increase the cost of running the
ATC system because FAA would be paying for both its new controllers
and those who the agency anticipated would retire but did not for
several years.  Considering the salary of starting controllers and
the time it takes to fully train them, hiring new controllers before
they are needed can be costly.  For example, FAA's estimate of future
retirees for fiscal year 2002 differs from those projected by using
age and service data by between 211 controllers and 273 controllers. 
A new controller currently makes about $29,000 annually, and once
benefits are added, the total cost of employing a new controller
reaches about $40,000 annually.  Because it takes about 3 years for a
new controller to reach the full performance level, the approximate
cost of the salary and benefits for a fully trained new controller
totals about $120,000 for the first 3 years.  If actual controller
retirements in fiscal year 2002 are 211 controllers to 273
controllers fewer than FAA projects, FAA would spend between $25.3
million and $32.8 million between fiscal years 2000 and 2002 to hire
and train those replacements that would not be needed. 

Conversely, if FAA did not hire enough controllers to replace those
who retired, those who remained would have to handle more of the
workload.  According to FAA officials, this increased workload could
cause an unanticipated increase in the use of overtime, and, in
extreme cases, lead to flight delays caused by the reduction in
services at some air traffic facilities.  According to FAA officials,
while such delays would be costly to the airlines and their
passengers, the delays would not affect flight safety.  FAA was not
able, however, to provide us with the data needed to estimate the
costs associated with such delays. 

Although officials we interviewed in eight of the nine FAA regions
anticipated a significant increase in retirements in the next 10
years, they disagreed on how soon this increase could occur.  While
some stated that they expected to see a significant increase by
fiscal years 2001 or 2002, others believed retirements would not
increase significantly until fiscal year 2005 or later. 


   CONCLUSIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:6

Because air traffic controllers are responsible for the safety of
millions of passengers each year, better estimates by FAA of the
future attrition of controllers would help ensure that the agency
hires and trains an adequate workforce.  While hiring enough
controllers to meet future needs created by increases in air traffic
and attrition, especially from retirements, is essential, hiring more
controllers than needed would increase the overall cost of running
the nation's ATC system.  On the other hand, hiring too few
controllers would also be costly, due to an increased use of overtime
and flight delays.  Predictions of the number of controllers FAA will
need in the future depend on many unknown variables, including how
the workload of controllers might change as a result of technological
advances, policy changes, and the future attrition rate of the
current workforce.  While there is no way to exactly predict how many
controllers will retire in each of the next 15 years, the accuracy of
FAA's methods of forecasting future staffing needs can be improved if
FAA uses some key information on the age and service of current
controllers. 


   RECOMMENDATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:7

We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation direct the
Administrator of FAA to incorporate actual information on the age,
years of service, and retirement eligibility date of current
controllers into its projections of future controller retirements. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:8

Although FAA officials told us that they have management controls in
place to adjust for actual attrition, they agreed with our
recommendation and plan to take action to better project future
controller retirements. 


FAA CAN MEET SHORT-TERM STAFFING
NEEDS WHILE DEVELOPING PLANS TO
ADDRESS LONG-TERM NEEDS
============================================================ Chapter 3

FAA plans to hire about 1,300 new controllers in fiscal years 1997
through 1998 to meet its short-term controller staffing needs.  A
sufficient number of controller candidates is available to fill these
staffing needs.  The majority of candidates available are former
PATCO members who left the controller workforce during the 1981
strike and could be eligible to retire at the same time as current
controllers. 

In fiscal years 1999 through 2002, FAA plans to hire a large number
of new controllers to satisfy its long-term controller staffing
needs.  Because it is uncertain whether enough controller candidates
will be available from the current sources to fill these needs, FAA
officials have announced plans to expand the CTI program to include
more schools and have reactivated the cooperative education
program.\1

Furthermore, FAA has also developed plans to revise its new
controller training program by requiring all new controller
candidates enrolled in the CTI and MARC programs to receive
standardized training at the FAA Academy before being assigned to ATC
facilities.  FAA believes that the revised training program will
reduce on-the-job training time and costs at the facility level. 
However, agency officials have not performed any analyses to
determine if the expected savings will offset the increased costs FAA
will incur by providing training at the Academy to all newly hired
controllers. 


--------------------
\1 The cooperative education program is a work study program in which
students have alternating classroom study and career-related work
experience.  This program allows students to become familiar with ATC
facilities and operations while completing requirements toward a
college degree. 


   A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF
   CONTROLLER CANDIDATES IS
   AVAILABLE TO FILL SHORT-TERM
   STAFFING NEEDS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1

FAA hired 257 new controllers during fiscal years 1995 through 1996
to meet its controller staffing needs.  One hundred and twelve (or 44
percent) of the new controllers were former PATCO members, 99 (or 39
percent) were CTI and MARC graduates, and the remaining 46 (or 18
percent) were cooperative education program graduates, air traffic
assistants working at the FAA, and former FAA and DOD controllers.\2

FAA plans to begin significantly increasing controller hiring by
adding 500 new controllers in fiscal year 1997 and 800 new
controllers in fiscal year 1998.  The new controllers will consist of
former PATCO members, CTI and MARC graduates, cooperative education
graduates, and former FAA and DOD controllers.  As shown in table
3.1, we found that more than enough such controller candidates are
available from these sources to fill FAA's projected staffing needs
for fiscal years 1997 and 1998. 



                               Table 3.1
                
                    Controller Hiring and Available
                Controller Candidates, Fiscal Years 1997
                                and 1998

                                    Controller              Controller
                        Controller  candidates  Controller  candidates
                           s to be   available     s to be   available
                          hired in    for hire    hired in    for hire
                            fiscal   in fiscal      fiscal   in fiscal
Source of candidates     year 1997   year 1997   year 1998   year 1998
----------------------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------
Former                         300        4483          \e       3,983
 PATCO members
CTI and MARC                   150       200\a          \e       250\b
 graduates
Cooperative education           \c   Unknown\d          \e   Unknown\d
 graduates
Former FAA and DOD              \c   Unknown\d          \e   Unknown\d
 controllers
Total                          500    At least         800    At least
                                         4,683                   4,233
                                    candidates              candidates
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a FAA, CTI, and MARC officials estimated that a total of 100 new CTI
and MARC graduates will become controller candidates in fiscal year
1997.  The other 100 candidates are CTI and MARC graduates currently
on FAA's "waiting list" to be hired. 

\b FAA, CTI, and MARC officials estimated that a total of 200 new CTI
and MARC graduates will become controller candidates in fiscal year
1998.  The other 50 will be CTI and MARC graduates not hired in
fiscal year 1997. 

\c FAA officials estimated that about 50 new controllers will be
hired during fiscal year 1997 from the pool of cooperative education
graduates and former FAA and DOD controllers. 

\d Although the exact total is unknown, FAA believes that many former
FAA and DOD controllers will be available in future years to fill
controller vacancies because of the large number of inquires received
from these candidates. 

\e FAA officials initially told us that in fiscal year 1998 they plan
to hire 500 former PATCO members, 250 CTI and MARC graduates, and 50
candidates from the pool of cooperative education graduates and
former FAA and DOD controllers.  While commenting on a draft of the
report, the officials told us that they are reexamining the number of
candidates to be hired from each of these sources. 

Source:  Data from FAA and the CTI and MARC programs. 


--------------------
\2 Percentages exceed 100 percent because of rounding. 


   REHIRING OF FORMER PATCO
   MEMBERS MAY ONLY FILL STAFFING
   NEEDS IN THE SHORT TERM
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2

In August 1993, after nearly 12 years, the bar on hiring former PATCO
members was repealed, and they were allowed to compete for employment
as air traffic controllers within FAA.  To date, FAA has hired 112
former PATCO members--37 in fiscal year 1995 and 75 in fiscal year
1996. 

The age range of former PATCO members hired in fiscal years 1995 and
1996 was 42 to 67, and the average age was 50.2 years.\3

According to FAA's data, the age range of the over 4,400 former PATCO
members eligible for rehire in fiscal year 1996 was 37 to 68, with
the average age being 49.9 years.\4 The majority of the FAA officials
interviewed at the headquarters, regional, and facility levels
commented that while former controllers have prior controller work
experience and could be a solution to the controller staffing
problem, they could only be a short-term solution.  The officials
commented that many of the former PATCO members already hired or
still eligible to be rehired could retire within a few years after
being reemployed with FAA because their average age is about 50.  We
could not verify what the officials told us because FAA has not
compiled the data necessary to determine when current controllers,
including former PATCO members already hired, will become eligible to
retire under the different controller retirement rules. 

FAA officials commented that although they will rely on former PATCO
members in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, and possibly in later years,
to fill controller vacancies, they are uncertain about how long these
former controllers will be able to work as air traffic controllers
and when they will need to be replaced.  The officials believe that
because of the age range of the former controllers and the different
retirement rules, FAA could be faced with an even more critical
staffing shortage in future years because many former PATCO members
and current controllers may be eligible to retire at the same time. 
Nevertheless, the officials told us that they have not conducted any
analyses to determine when the former PATCO members currently in the
controller candidate pool will become eligible for retirement. 


--------------------
\3 Since some former PATCO controllers were hired prior to 1972, they
are not subject to mandatory retirement rules. 

\4 FAA developed its list of eligible PATCO members in 1993 after
about 4,500 fired controllers responded to a job announcement in
September 1993. 


   FAA IS EXPANDING ITS CONTROLLER
   CANDIDATE POOL TO ADDRESS
   LONG-TERM STAFFING NEEDS AND IS
   REVISING ITS CONTROLLER
   TRAINING PROGRAM
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3

In addition to the 1,300 new controllers FAA plans to hire in fiscal
years 1997 and 1998 to meet its short-term staffing needs, FAA plans
to hire a large number of new controllers in fiscal years 1999
through 2002 to meet its long-term controller staffing needs.  To
satisfy the agency's long-term staffing needs, FAA officials said
they expect to get some controller candidates from current sources. 
Specifically, the officials commented, and CTI and MARC officials
agreed, that these schools can produce at least 200 graduates per
year under their existing programs, which represents about 800
candidates during this 4-year period.  PATCO members may also provide
some controller candidates, and there is high interest from former
FAA and DOD controllers to fill controller positions.  However, taken
together, these current sources may not provide enough controllers
after fiscal year 1999. 

To expand the pool of available controller candidates, FAA
headquarters officials announced in January 1997 their plans to
expand the CTI program to include 18 additional schools and to
reactivate the cooperative education program.  According to FAA
officials we interviewed, schools currently offering aviation degrees
and located near hard-to-staff facilities will be given higher
priority.  The officials believe this approach will provide a better
geographical match between staffing needs at the facility level and
the available candidates.  The final school selections will be
completed by September 1997.  Although FAA has decided on the number
of schools to include in its expanded program, the officials could
not tell us the number of controller candidates they expect to be
available from these programs to meet their long-term staffing needs. 

In addition to expanding the pool of available controller candidates,
FAA officials told us that they have revised the agency's initial
controller training program.  This revision will be the third major
change in FAA's training program within the past 10 years.  Until
fiscal year 1990, all new controller candidates were required to
receive initial screening and controller training, which included
academic and skill-building training, at the Academy in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma.  In fiscal years 1990 and 1991, FAA began relying on
the MARC and CTI schools, respectively, to supplement its training
program and to make more controller candidates available.  FAA hired
CTI and MARC graduates and placed them directly at ATC facilities,
bypassing any training at the Academy.  The graduates completed their
on-the-job training, which consisted of classroom and hands-on
instructional training provided by FPL controllers and contractors,
at the facilities.  In fiscal year 1992, however, FAA stopped
providing initial controller training for newly hired controllers at
the Academy because of a sharp decrease in controller hiring. 
Nevertheless, the MARC and CTI schools continued to provide
controller training even though only 250 graduates were hired by FAA
from fiscal years 1992 through 1995. 

Beginning in fiscal year 1998 under its revised controller training
program, FAA will require all controller candidates enrolled in the
CTI and MARC programs to successfully complete the technical
skill-building portion of initial controller training at the Academy
before being assigned to a facility.  The CTI and MARC controller
candidates will continue to receive academic and some technical
skill-building training at their schools.  Newly hired controllers,
other than ones from the CTI and MARC programs, will receive academic
and technical skill-building training at the Academy.  Former PATCO
members, as well as FAA and DOD controllers will continue to receive
refresher training at the Academy.  Figure 3.1 compares FAA's
existing and revised training programs. 

   Figure 3.1:  Comparison of
   FAA's Existing and Revised
   Training Programs

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

FAA believes that the revised approach to controller training will
reduce on-the-job training time and costs at the facility level
because all new controllers entering ATC facilities will receive
standardized training on the latest ATC equipment and will be well
versed in existing ATC policies, procedures, and requirements.  The
officials told us that in the long term, the Academy can provide the
skill-building training more efficiently than hundreds of individual
ATC facilities.  Furthermore, the officials said that they expect
graduates of a combined CTI-Academy training program to spend less
time in on-the-job training because the Academy will give them early
experience working with the ATC equipment actually used at the
facilities. 

Although FAA headquarters officials commented that revising the
controller training program will reduce training time and costs at
the facility level, we did not find nor could FAA provide evidence to
support this position.  While some CTI schools do not have the latest
ATC equipment, they are able to simulate air traffic conditions. 
Moreover, FAA could not provide evidence that there is any difference
between controllers trained on the latest ATC equipment and
simulators.  Although FAA believes that it may realize some cost
savings from centralizing training at the Academy, federal training
costs will increase in the short term because FAA will pay the
expenses for a portion of the training of CTI graduates, who
currently pay these costs themselves as part of the controller
training curriculum. 

Despite the lack of data on controller training costs, FAA still
plans to revise its training program--without knowing whether the
anticipated reduction in training time and costs for newly hired
controllers will occur and offset increased training costs at the
Academy.  During the 1997 calendar year, FAA plans to hire CTI and
MARC graduates with and without Academy training.  By monitoring its
training costs and following the progress of the two groups of new
controllers, FAA could determine whether the anticipated savings will
be realized. 


   CONCLUSIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4

FAA predicts that it will need to hire about 3,400 new controllers
over the next 6 years.  Although a sufficient number of controller
candidates are available to meet the agency's short-term staffing
needs, the majority of the candidates are former PATCO members, who
could, if hired, be eligible for retirement at the same time as many
current controllers.  Because FAA does not know when these
controllers will retire, it is uncertain when they will need to be
replaced.  In addition, it is uncertain whether FAA's current sources
for controller candidates can provide a sufficient number of
candidates to meet its long-term staffing needs.  Therefore, FAA's
efforts to expand the pool of available candidates could help to
address this potential problem. 

Although FAA officials believe that revising the existing controller
training program will reduce on-the-job training time and costs, this
change could result in FAA incurring training costs currently being
paid by controller candidates.  Also, since FAA has no data to
support it assertion that CTI and MARC graduates take longer to
complete on-the-job training than other controller candidates or that
centralizing a portion of the training at the Academy will reduce
training costs, the savings FAA expects to gain from revising its
program may not offset the increased training costs at the Academy. 


   RECOMMENDATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:5

We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation direct the
Administrator of FAA to (1) determine, for future planning purposes,
when former PATCO members currently in the controller candidate pool
will become eligible to retire and would need to be replaced, by
evaluating demographic data, such as the former controllers' age,
years spent actually controlling traffic, and years of potential
retirement eligibility, and (2) monitor the training costs for CTI
and MARC graduates hired in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, who will be
trained under the old and new programs, to determine whether the
anticipated savings will be realized and whether such savings will
offset the increased costs of providing centralized training at the
Academy. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:6

FAA officials agreed with our recommendations and plan to take action
to better determine when controllers will retire and the cost of
training new controllers. 


FAA HAS IDENTIFIED SEVERAL
IMPEDIMENTS THAT HINDER ITS
ABILITY TO STAFF ATC FACILITIES AT
SPECIFIED LEVELS
============================================================ Chapter 4

Controller staffing at the national and regional levels closely
reflected the levels specified by the staffing standards.  However,
we identified significant differences between actual staffing and the
levels specified by the standards at about half of FAA's ATC
facilities.  According to FAA officials, certain circumstances, such
as workload factors unique to particular facilities, justify
deviations from the standards.  In addition, FAA officials believe
that some differences are justified on the basis of the professional
judgment of facility managers.  However, they also believe that some
facilities have too many controllers, while others have too few,
relative to the workload at the facilities. 

FAA officials pointed out that at facilities where there are too many
or too few controllers, several factors hinder FAA's ability to
alleviate the staffing differences.  These impediments include FAA's
practice of waiting until the end of the fiscal year to distribute
funds to move controllers, regional officials' inability to conduct
regional hiring of new controllers, and limited hiring in recent
years of new controllers to fill vacancies.  Although several FAA
officials commented that staffing differences can not be totally
alleviated, FAA has proposed a variety of initiatives to address
existing differences.  Because these initiatives are relatively
recent, their effectiveness may not be known for several years. 


   MANY ATC FACILITIES ARE NOT
   STAFFED AT SPECIFIED LEVELS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:1

As of April 10, 1996, we found that at the national and regional
levels, there were only slight differences between the actual number
of controllers and the levels specified by the standards.  For
example, at the national level, the actual controller workforce was
17,163, compared to 17,465 as specified by the staffing standards,
representing a difference of less than 2 percent.  At the regional
level, the actual staffing levels for all nine regions were within 5
percent of the levels specified by the standards. 

In response to our survey, FAA regional and NATCA officials said that
a larger number of controllers were needed than the levels specified
by the staffing standards.  More specifically, FAA officials in six
of the nine regions commented that nearly 1,100 additional
controllers were needed in their regions.  In contrast, FAA's
staffing standards indicated that over 400 additional controllers
were needed in those regions.  FAA officials in the other three
regions considered their current staffing levels adequate to meet
their needs.  According to NATCA representatives, controller staffing
needs were even greater at the regional level than those reported by
FAA's regional officials.  For example, according to NATCA's
estimates, FAA needs an additional 1,750 controllers in the three
regions they represent, while FAA regional officials estimated that
only 670 additional controllers are needed in those regions. 

FAA headquarters officials told us that different staffing needs
estimates exist because FAA regional officials and NATCA
representatives use different approaches to determine the estimates. 
However, FAA headquarters officials rely on validated engineered
staffing standards. 

In responding to our survey, most of the FAA regional officials told
us that they based their estimates on the staffing standards, as well
as other data, such as staffing needs information gathered directly
from facility managers.  In addition, NATCA officials reported using
data on facility workloads and projected attrition.  We did not
verify the validity of the data or the procedures reported to us by
the regional FAA and NATCA officials. 

As shown in figure 4.1, staffing levels at 16 of the 24 en route
centers were within 10 percent of the levels specified by the
standards.  Four of the eight remaining facilities were staffed at
levels greater than 10 percent over the staffing standards, whereas
the other four facilities were staffed at least 10 percent under the
standards levels. 

   Figure 4.1:  Comparison of the
   Current Number of Controllers
   and Staffing Standards Levels
   for En Route Centers

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

In contrast to en route centers, we found that 165 (or 45.5 percent)
of the 363 terminal facilities were staffed at levels within 10
percent of the staffing standards, as shown in figure 4.2.  Another
77 terminal facilities (or 21.2 percent) were staffed at levels
greater than 10 percent above the staffing standards, while the
remaining 121 facilities (or 33.3 percent) were staffed more than 10
percent below the staffing standards. 

   Figure 4.2:  Comparison of the
   Current Number of Controllers
   and Staffing Standards Levels
   for Terminal Facilities

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Source:  FAA's data.

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

FAA officials at the headquarters, regional, and facility levels
acknowledged that significant differences exist between actual
staffing and the levels specified by the standards at many terminal
facilities.  However, they also noted that the standards are used as
a management tool in conjunction with professional judgment and that
certain circumstances could cause terminal facilities to justifiably
deviate from the standards.  Circumstances, such as changes in air
traffic levels or a given terminal facility's capacity, could
increase or decrease the number of controllers needed.  For example,
officials in FAA's Southern Region told us that ongoing airport
improvements, which are expected to be completed in the summer of
1997, have the potential to significantly increase the capacity at a
principal international airport in that region.  As a result of these
improvements, the officials commented that controller staffing needs
could increase significantly.  Although they could not estimate the
exact number of additional controllers needed because the impact of
the increased capacity will not be known until the airport
improvements are completed, they indicated that the additional
staffing needs are not reflected in the latest staffing standards. 
Circumstances such as these often explain why some facilities are
overstaffed or understaffed relative to the staffing standards. 
However, FAA headquarters officials acknowledged that there are
facilities where staffing differences are not justified and pointed
out that they are working to address staffing problems. 


   FAA OFFICIALS IDENTIFIED
   IMPEDIMENTS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO
   STAFFING IMBALANCES AT ATC
   FACILITIES
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2

FAA officials at the headquarters, regional, and facility levels
identified a number of impediments that hinder FAA's ability to
reduce staffing differences at facilities where there are too many or
too few controllers relative to their workloads.  These impediments
include FAA's practice of not providing funds to move controllers
until the end of the fiscal year, a practice that delays the prompt
movement of controllers to fill vacancies, and regional officials'
inability to recruit local candidates to minimize controller
transfers among facilities.  In addition, regional officials we
contacted cited the recent lack of hiring and the need for a
continuous source of new controllers to fill vacancies caused by
ongoing attrition.  The officials also said that other factors, such
as their inability to attract controllers to less desirable
facilities, quality of life concerns, and unexpected attrition, will
continuously impede their ability to alleviate staffing differences. 


      REPROGRAMMING OF FUNDS
      DELAYS CONTROLLER MOVES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2.1

FAA designates a specified amount of funds at the beginning of the
fiscal year for permanent-change-of-station (PCS) moves to relocate
controllers from facility to facility to address staffing needs. 
Also, these funds are used to fill critical managerial and controller
vacancies nationwide and maintain an appropriate level of controllers
at ATC facilities.  We found that FAA does not distribute the
majority of PCS funds until the end of the fiscal year.  FAA
headquarters officials told us that PCS funds are often used as
discretionary funds throughout the fiscal year to supplement
shortfalls in the Air Traffic Services (ATS) budget.  These funds are
reprogrammed to pay for cost increases related to salaries and for
the contract tower and weather programs. 

FAA headquarters officials told us that while PCS moneys are used to
supplement cost increases for other ATS operations during the year,
there have been sufficient funds by the end of the fiscal year to pay
for all requested and approved controller moves.  These end-of-year
funds are available because other ATS units do not spend all moneys
budgeted for their operations.  FAA headquarters officials then
reprogram the unspent funds to pay for controller moves.  For
example, as shown in table 4.1, FAA designated $17.5 million in
fiscal year 1996 for PCS moves.  Initially, ATS distributed $3.7
million in PCS funds and reprogrammed $13.8 million to supplement
cost increases for the contract tower and weather programs. 
Subsequently, ATS made an additional $19.2 million available for PCS
moves, which was not provided to the FAA regions until the end of the
fiscal year. 



                                        Table 4.1
                         
                          Summary of PCS Funding, Spending, and
                         Moves for Fiscal Years 1993-97 (Dollars
                                       in millions)

                                      Initial
                        Funds    distribution       PCS funds     Total ATS
                    initially            from    reprogrammed   funds spent           PCS
               designated for    appropriated    to other ATS       for PCS    controller
Fiscal year         PCS moves       PCS funds           units         moves         moves
-------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  ------------  ------------
1993                  No data            $8.5         No data         $21.7           552
1994                    $21.6             4.3           $17.3          14.1           333
1995                   17.5\a            14.4           3.1\b          39.8           882
1996                     17.5             3.7            13.8          22.9           456
1997                     15.5             2.5            13.0        15.5\c         319\c
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  FAA data. 

\a $17.5 million earmarked by the Congress. 

\b PCS funds held in reserve, distributed at end of fiscal year. 

\c Estimate. 

According to FAA regional officials we surveyed, the practice of
distributing PCS funds at the end of the fiscal year delays the
prompt transfer of controllers.  At facilities where vacancies are
not filled promptly, overtime use may be excessive and some
controllers may be denied opportunities to take leave or attend
training.  In addition, regional officials commented that
reprogramming PCS funds creates uncertainty and inhibits the
effective allocation of resources within their regions.  They believe
that a stable distribution of funds throughout the fiscal year would
help them better address existing staffing differences.  A majority
of facility managers we surveyed also expressed concerns about PCS
funding levels, and several commented that the availability of
sufficient PCS funds would help them reduce staffing differences at
ATC facilities. 

We found that officials at the FAA headquarters, regional, and
facility levels had different views about whether sufficient funds
have been available in past years to pay for all requested PCS moves. 
While FAA headquarters officials stated that sufficient funds for
requested and approved PCS moves have been available by the end of
the fiscal year, a majority of the regional officials we surveyed
said that sufficient PCS funds were often not available for all
controller moves throughout the fiscal year.  We could not verify
what the officials told us because FAA does not maintain information
on the number of PCS moves initially requested and subsequently
approved at the end of the fiscal year.  FAA headquarters officials
commented that the practice of using PCS funds to supplement cost
increases for ATS operations could create problems in the controller
workforce in the future if FAA continues to experience substantial
shortfalls in its overall budget.  Specifically, the FAA headquarters
officials told us that if funds were not made available by the end of
a fiscal year, controller moves could not be made, and staffing
differences at ATC facilities could increase.  FAA headquarters
officials noted, however, that the agency's flexibility to provide
PCS funding throughout the fiscal year has been constrained by the
necessity to have discretionary funding available to supplement
potential budget shortfalls, such as cost increases related to
salaries and contract programs. 


      LACK OF ABILITY TO CONDUCT
      REGIONAL HIRING HINDERS
      ALLEVIATION OF STAFFING
      PROBLEMS AT ATC FACILITIES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2.2

Although FAA regional officials have the authority to recruit
controller candidates for facilities in their regions, they do not
have the ability to recruit locally due to constraints in hiring on
an agencywide basis.  While some regional officials have recruited
controller staff under certain circumstances, they must generally
select new controllers from the available pool of controller
candidates--primarily former PATCO members and graduates from the
four CTI schools and MARC--regardless of the candidates' geographic
preferences. 

FAA officials also told us that the ability to recruit locally would
help improve retention because new controllers could be recruited
directly from their preferred geographic areas.  FAA headquarters
officials believe that controllers tend to stay longer in locations
more desirable to them, thereby, reducing the potential for
controller transfers from facilities with staffing problems. 

In response to our survey, regional and terminal facility officials
also told us that localized hiring would allow them to recruit and
retain controllers in areas where hard-to-staff facilities are
located.  Under current practice, a controller from a small town in
the Midwest may be placed at a facility in a large metropolitan area
that is difficult to staff.  As a result, the controller may later
request a transfer to another facility that the controller prefers or
resign from FAA; such events may cause a staffing shortage and
adversely affect employee morale. 


      REGIONAL OFFICIALS CITE A
      LACK OF RECENT HIRING AND
      THE NEED FOR NEW CONTROLLERS
      TO ADDRESS STAFFING
      DIFFERENCES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2.3

Officials in all nine of FAA's regions expressed concerns about the
lack of recent hiring and the need for a continuous supply of new
controllers to fill vacancies due to transfers, promotions, and
retirements at ATC facilities.  The majority of regional officials
said that an ongoing supply of newly hired controllers would help
address staffing shortages that increase the use of overtime and
limit opportunities for controllers to take leave or attend training. 
In response to our survey, some officials raised concerns that the
shortages could increase if large numbers of controllers retire in
future years.  For example, officials in the Great Lakes Region told
us that although they hired 40 new controllers in fiscal year 1996,
these new controllers were insufficient to replace the controllers
lost through ongoing attrition.  In addition, officials in the
Western-Pacific Region told us that a sufficient supply of new
controllers is needed for lower- level facilities, which serve as a
staffing source for higher-level ATC facilities.  Although the
Western-Pacific officials said that they have been working with
headquarters officials to acquire more new controllers for their
region, they have been unsuccessful because FAA has hired very few
new controllers in recent years. 


      OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES HINDER
      FAA'S ABILITY TO ADDRESS
      STAFFING NEEDS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2.4

Officials at the FAA headquarters, regional, and facility levels
commented that certain circumstances will continuously affect their
ability to alleviate staffing differences.  These circumstances
include (1) FAA's inability to attract controllers to facilities
located in less desirable--remote or high-cost--areas; (2) quality of
life concerns, such as controllers' desire to live in certain parts
of the country; (3) unanticipated attrition resulting from controller
retirements, resignations, and deaths; and (4) unexpected changes in
air traffic in certain areas, such as the openings and closings of
air carrier hubs. 


   FAA HAS SEVERAL INITIATIVES
   UNDER WAY TO ADDRESS STAFFING
   DIFFERENCES
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:3

FAA headquarters officials cited several initiatives under way at the
headquarters, regional, and facility levels to address staffing
differences.  These initiatives include programs to promote regional
recruitment and hiring of new controllers for regions with staffing
problems, an interim incentive pay program to attract controllers to
facilities with long-standing controller staffing problems, and the
creation of the Office of Air Traffic Operations (ATO) within FAA
headquarters to better coordinate controller transfers and develop an
information-based method to more accurately determine controller
staffing needs at the facility level. 


      REGIONAL RECRUITMENT AND
      HIRING WOULD REDUCE STAFFING
      DIFFERENCES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:3.1

As part of its initiatives to alleviate staffing problems, FAA is
considering actions to increase hiring directly from areas with
hard-to-staff facilities, such as expanding the CTI program to
include more schools near these facilities and reactivating the
cooperative education program.  By creating a pool of candidates near
hard-to-staff facilities, FAA expects that regions can attract
additional new controllers from their preferred geographic areas. 
Under the proposed initiatives, regional officials will play a
greater role in recruiting employees on a more localized basis. 

In response to our survey, the majority of regional officials we
contacted told us that a greater role in local hiring would
significantly help reduce controller staffing differences.  Moreover,
FAA officials told us that localized hiring would reduce the costs
for PCS moves and produce a more motivated and satisfied controller
workforce. 


      INTERIM INCENTIVE PAY
      PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO
      ADDRESS STAFFING DIFFERENCES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:3.2

In April 1996, FAA established an interim incentive pay program,
similar to a pay demonstration program implemented in 1989, to
attract controllers to seven major facilities that have a history of
staffing problems.\1 This program provides an incentive of 10-percent
of the base pay for controllers working at these seven facilities: 
the New York En Route Center, New York TRACON facility, Chicago En
Route Center, O'Hare TRACON facility, O'Hare Tower, Bay TRACON
facility, and Oakland En Route Center.  The interim incentive program
is intended to be in effect until fiscal year 1998 when a new ATS pay
system is expected to be implemented.  The new pay system is one of
several efforts under FAA's new personnel reform initiatives, which
the agency began implementing in April 1996.\2

In response to our survey, officials at the Chicago En Route Center
commented that the interim incentive pay program has played an
important role in attracting new controllers to their facility.  For
example, over the last year, several new controllers have transferred
to the facility, which has helped address staffing problems.  FAA
headquarters officials told us that they expect the interim program
will help recruit and retain controllers at other hard-to-staff
facilities until a long-term program is in place, such as the new pay
system FAA is developing. 


--------------------
\1 In 1989, FAA implemented the Pay Demonstration Program to recruit
and retain experienced controllers at hard-to-staff facilities. 
Controllers working at the selected facilities were given an
additional 20 percent premium pay.  This program ended in June 1994
because of budget constraints. 

\2 The FAA Administrator was given the authority to reform the
agency's personnel system under the 1996 Transportation
Appropriations Act. 


      OFFICE OF AIR TRAFFIC
      OPERATIONS OVERSEES
      CONTROLLER ALLOCATIONS TO
      REDUCE STAFFING DIFFERENCES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:3.3

In early 1996, FAA headquarters created ATO to (1) ensure that
facilities are staffed at appropriate levels, (2) verify that
newly-hired controllers are placed where critical staffing vacancies
exist, and (3) monitor regional staffing allocations, among other
resource allocation functions.  ATO officials work with headquarters,
regional, and facility officials to ensure that staffing imbalances
do not occur due to controller transfers or reassignments and to
verify that new controllers are placed where vacancies exist. 

For example, ATO officials gather information on staffing
requirements and air traffic operations from regional and facility
officials to verify that facilities are staffed according to current
needs.  Using this information, ATO officials have consulted with
headquarters officials who are responsible for agencywide resources
and budgeting to make recommendations on staffing allocations.  As
part of this process, ATO officials have monitored controller moves
and transfers to ensure that staffing imbalances do not occur because
of changes in controller allocations.  Agreement between ATO and
other headquarters officials must be reached on changes in controller
allocations. 

To better address staffing needs at ATC facilities, ATO has developed
and is testing a new computer program to provide a mechanism for air
traffic managers in FAA headquarters, regions, and facilities to
evaluate the past utilization of controller resources and more
effectively project controller staffing requirements.  According to
ATO officials, the new computer program will provide more accurate
facility-level staffing requirements than the staffing standards
because it includes operational data on the number of hours
controllers have actually performed ATC functions and activities such
as training, leave, and administrative duties.  ATO officials told us
that the new computer program will also provide a standardized method
to better project controller staffing needs at individual ATC
facilities.  They plan to use this program in conjunction with the
staffing standards.  FAA is currently pilot testing this program at
some en route centers, with plans to have it fully operational by the
end of fiscal year 1997. 


   CONCLUSIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:4

While FAA officials face several impediments that have hindered the
alleviation of staffing differences at many terminal facilities, the
impediments are not insurmountable.  However, FAA's practice of
distributing PCS funds at the end of the fiscal year not only delays
controller transfers but could create staffing problems in future
years.  FAA officials recognize the potential for these problems but
face difficult choices in their efforts to move controllers to fill
critical vacancies, while maintaining the flexibility to respond to
budget shortfalls throughout the fiscal year.  Although FAA's recent
initiatives may reduce some staffing differences, it is too soon to
determine their effectiveness. 


EXPLANATION OF THE MODEL WE USED
TO ESTIMATE FUTURE CONTROLLER
RETIREMENTS
=========================================================== Appendix I

To estimate the number of potential controller retirees over the next
15 years, we developed a computer model that simulates the retirement
patterns of the current controller workforce.  The model uses data
from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on the age and federal
service time of controllers who retired in fiscal years 1992 through
1996 to project the future retirement date of current controllers. 
Because the rate of retirements due to disability is not expected to
differ significantly over time, such retirements were excluded from
our analysis. 

The key to our retirement model is the probability of retirement for
an age and length of service combination, called a "cohort." To
develop the probabilities, we used 17 3-year age ranges and 17 3-year
length of service categories.  For example, controllers between the
ages of 55 and 57 and those with between 34 and 36 years of service
were grouped together.  For each fiscal year from 1992 through 1996,
we determined the total number of controllers in each age and length
of service combination and the number of those controllers who had
retired.\1 The probability of retirement for any age and length of
service cohort was then calculated by simply dividing the total
number of retired controllers by the total number of controllers in
that cohort.  The probabilities were then averaged over the 5 years
to arrive at a final retirement probability for each cohort.  The
resulting probabilities can be envisioned as a table with 17 rows for
the various age ranges and 17 columns for the various categories for
length of service.  This table, called the retirement probability
matrix, served as the basis for the model we used to project each
controller's retirement. 

The model used FAA's data on the age and length of service of the
17,019 controllers who were actively working as controllers or
supervisors as of October 1, 1996.  Each controller's age and length
of service was then entered and the probability of the controller's
retirement was determined using the retirement probability matrix. 
For example, a controller between the ages of 55 and 57 with 34 to 36
years of service had a probability of retirement of 0.19.  A uniform
random number between 0.00 and 1.00, inclusive, was then generated
for that controller.  In this example, if the random number were
between 0.00 and 0.19, inclusive, we estimated that the controller
would retire in fiscal year 1997.  If the random number exceeded
0.19, we added 1 year to that controller's age and 1 year to that
controller's length of service.  This process was repeated for each
of the 17,019 controllers. 

The process was then continued for those controllers who were not
estimated as having retired in 1997 but with each controller now
being 1 year older and with 1 more year of service.  As before, the
controller's new age and new length of service determined the
probability that the controller would retire in that year.  Random
numbers were then generated, a retirement decision was made for each
of the remaining controllers, and each controller was either counted
as having retired in 1998 or 1 year was again added to both the age
and the length of service.  This process was repeated 15 times to
represent a 15-year horizon. 

Because we were dealing with a process that is of a probablistic
nature (i.e., a controller may or may not have retired in any one
year), we repeated the process 300 times.  The results for the 300
iterations were then averaged to estimate the number of controllers
retiring in year 1 through year 15 (representing fiscal years 1997
though 2011). 

The following table presents the results of this analysis.  It shows
the minimum, average, and maximum number of controllers estimated to
retire during each fiscal year between 1997 and 2011. 



                               Table I.1
                
                     Estimated Number of Controller
                  Retirements Based on Age and Service
                                  Time

                                   Minimum       Average       Maximum
                              retirements\  retirements\  retirements\
Fiscal year                              a             b             c
----------------------------  ------------  ------------  ------------
1997                                   159           198           230
1998                                   177           211           256
1999                                   168           214           249
2000                                   198           237           283
2001                                   232           270           310
2002                                   260           299           343
2003                                   298           335           397
2004                                   310           371           420
2005                                   349           410           463
2006                                   410           459           514
2007                                   448           507           570
2008                                   512           565           636
2009                                   557           626           687
2010                                   599           673           743
2011                                   645           724           790
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The lowest number of retirees projected by the model's 300
iterations, by year. 

\b The average number of retirees projected by all of the model's 300
iterations, by year. 

\c The greatest number of retirees projected by the model's 300
iterations, by year. 


--------------------
\1 In our analysis, we included those controllers who accepted
buyouts, such as the fiscal year 1994 buyout described in chapter 2. 
During such buyouts, employees can retire with less service time and
at a lower age than required for normal retirement.  Therefore,
because FAA does not plan any future buyouts for controllers, our
model may slightly overestimate the number of future retirements. 


FAA REGIONAL OFFICES, AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROL FACILITIES, AND NATCA
REPRESENTATIVES CONTACTED FOR OUR
REVIEW
========================================================== Appendix II


   FAA REGIONS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1

Alaskan Region - Air Traffic Division
Central Region - Air Traffic Division
Eastern Region - Air Traffic Division
Great Lakes Region - Air Traffic Division
New England Region - Air Traffic Division
Northwest Mountain Region - Air Traffic Division
Southern Region - Air Traffic Division
Southwest Region - Air Traffic Division
Western-Pacific Region - Air Traffic Division


   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2


      GREAT LAKES REGION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.1

Chicago, Illinois - Air Route Traffic Control Center
Green Bay, Wisconsin - Air Traffic Control Tower
Minneapolis- St.  Paul, Minnesota - Air Traffic Control Tower
Youngstown, Ohio - Air Traffic Control Tower
Pontiac, Michigan - Air Traffic Control Tower
Champaign, Illinois - Air Traffic Control Tower
Grand Rapids, Michigan - Air Traffic Control Tower


      SOUTHERN REGION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.2

Miami, Florida - Air Route Traffic Control Center
Sarasota-Bradenton, Florida - Air Traffic Control Tower
Jacksonville, Florida - Air Traffic Control Tower
Chattanooga, Tennessee - Air Traffic Control Tower
Daytona Beach, Florida - Air Traffic Control Tower
Fayetteville, North Carolina - Air Traffic Control Tower
Pensacola, Florida - Terminal Radar Approach Control Facility


      EASTERN REGION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.3

New York City, New York - Air Route Traffic Control Center


      NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC
      CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION
      (NATCA)
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.4

NATCA Eastern Region\1
NATCA Great Lakes Region
NATCA Southern Region


--------------------
\1 Telephone interview conducted; completed survey not returned to
us. 


MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================= Appendix III

RESOURCES, COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

Nancy A.  Boardman
Alice G.  Feldesman
Lynne L.  Goldfarb
Isidro L.  Gomez
Wanda T.  Hawkins
Mitchell B.  Karpman
David A.  Rogers
Marnie S.  Shaul
James R.  Sweetman, Jr. 


   OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:1

David K.  Hooper


*** End of document. ***