![](media/image1.jpeg){width="8.75in" height="1.4958333333333333in"}F

![](media/image2.png){width="1.2743055555555556in"
height="0.4701388888888889in"}

**LAAS Benefits Analysis**

**Preliminary Findings**

**Update to LAAS Efficiency Benefits**

**June 2004**

**Table of Contents**

[[Introduction]{.smallcaps} - 3 -](#introduction)

[[Summary of Changes from February 2004 Preliminary
Findings]{.smallcaps} - 4
-](#summary-of-changes-from-february-2004-preliminary-findings)

[[Stakeholder Validation]{.smallcaps} - 6 -](#stakeholder-validation)

[[Important Considerations for Interpreting Results]{.smallcaps} - 9
-](#important-considerations-for-interpreting-results)

[[Efficiency Benefits]{.smallcaps} - 12 -](#efficiency-benefits)

[[Summary of Efficiency Benefits]{.smallcaps} - 12
-](#summary-of-efficiency-benefits)

[Reduced Disruptions for Straight-in Precision Approaches - 25
-](#reduced-disruptions-for-straight-in-precision-approaches)

[Reduced Disruptions with LAAS Takeoff Guidance - 31
-](#__RefHeading___Toc76387635)

[Benefits from LAAS-based Complex Procedures - 33
-](#benefits-from-laas-based-complex-procedures)

[Benefits Due to Elimination of ILS Critical Areas - 36
-](#benefits-due-to-elimination-of-ils-critical-areas)

[Benefits for Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches - 40
-](#benefits-for-closely-spaced-parallel-approaches)

[[Safety Benefits]{.smallcaps} - 44 -](#safety-benefits)

[[Societal Benefits]{.smallcaps} - 45 -](#societal-benefits)

[[Appendices]{.smallcaps} - 46 -](#appendices)

[Appendix A: Airports Included in this Study - 46
-](#appendix-a-airports-included-in-this-study)

[Appendix B: Order of Installation of LAAS Ground Facilities - 49
-](#appendix-b-order-of-installation-of-laas-ground-facilities)

[Appendix C: Derivation of Disruption Costs - 52
-](#appendix-c-derivation-of-disruption-costs)

[Appendix D: Sensitivity Analyses - 55
-](#appendix-d-sensitivity-analyses)

[Appendix E: Derivation of the Single Airport Delay Model - 59
-](#appendix-e-derivation-of-the-single-airport-delay-model)

[Appendix F: Navigation Capabilities Baseline - 64
-](#appendix-f-navigation-capabilities-baseline)

[Appendix G: Potential LAAS Sites Outside of the 120 Airports - 77
-](#appendix-g-potential-laas-sites-outside-of-the-120-airports)

[Appendix H: Aviation Facilities within 23nm of the 120 Airports - 78
-](#appendix-h-aviation-facilities-within-23nm-of-the-120-airports)

[Appendix I: LAAS Benefits Analysis Assumptions - 81
-](#appendix-i-laas-benefits-analysis-assumptions)

[Appendix J: LAAS Efficiency Benefits by User Group - 83
-](#appendix-j-laas-efficiency-benefits-by-user-group)

[Appendix K: Data Sources - 91 -](#appendix-k-data-sources)

[Appendix L: List of Acronyms - 92 -](#appendix-l-list-of-acronyms)

[[Notes and References]{.smallcaps} - 94 -](#notes-and-references)

# [Introduction]{.smallcaps}

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is transforming the navigation
infrastructure of the national airspace system (NAS), from a
ground-based to a Global Positioning System (GPS)-based architecture.
Part of this transformation entails the acquisition of augmentation
systems to improve the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the GPS
signals. The Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) is one of these
systems, specifically designed to support aircraft operations in the
terminal, approach, surface, and departure operational domains.

The FAA contracted with IBM Business Consulting Services to provide an
independent analysis that estimates the benefits attributable to LAAS
beyond those provided by existing and planned navigation services. These
benefits are estimated over a 20 year period (2009-2028), at 120
selected airports[^1], and for five distinct user groups; major and
regional passenger airlines, cargo carriers, corporate jet operators,
and general aviation (GA) operators in Alaska. This analysis serves as
an update of previous studies[^2] [^3] [^4] [^5] as well as a more
comprehensive and detailed evaluation of contributions that can be
expected from LAAS. The analysis is based on independent research, and
is supported by inputs solicited from both service providers and airline
industry stakeholders, including validation of methodology, data, and
output. The results of this analysis will be used to support the FAA,
the airlines, and other stakeholders in their procurement and
implementation decisions related to LAAS.

The first stage of the benefits analysis, completed in November 2003,
involved the establishment of the navigation capabilities baseline
against which all LAAS benefits would be measured[^6]. The second stage,
completed in December 2003, entailed determining the incremental
capabilities provided by LAAS, above and beyond this baseline[^7]. In
February 2004, IBM delivered a Preliminary Findings report, which
described a series of analyses conducted to estimate the monetized
incremental benefits that can be expected from implementation of LAAS,
relative to the baseline. The current document updates the preliminary
findings related to efficiency benefits. Subsequent deliverables will
update the safety and societal benefits results. A final report
encompassing all of the benefits will be published in October 2004.

**Structure of this Paper**

This document provides an update to the preliminary findings for
efficiency benefits. This update is based on feedback received from a
wide variety of reviewers of the preliminary findings document,
delivered February 25, 2004. Feedback consisted of written comments, as
well as interviews and site visits with stakeholders in the FAA and the
aviation industry.

The updated efficiency benefits sections of this paper describe in
detail some of the principal capabilities of LAAS and give specific
estimates of quantified benefits expected from the implementation of
LAAS.

# [Summary of Changes from February 2004 Preliminary Findings]{.smallcaps}

The following list highlights a number of important changes and
refinements made to the LAAS efficiency benefits estimates since the
Preliminary Findings were delivered on February 25, 2004.

-   Reviews and Validation with Stakeholders

    -   Incorporated, as fully as possible, comments received from
        reviewers of the February 2004 Preliminary Findings

    -   Reviewed and validated the methodology and inputs with FAA and
        industry representatives, including:

        -   Five airports and five airlines

            -   MEM and FedEx

            -   SEA and Alaska Airlines

                -   also Horizon Airlines and Boeing

            -   BDL and Southwest Airlines

            -   EWR and Continental Airlines

            -   ORD and United Airlines

-   General

    -   Included unscheduled IFR and VFR traffic in air traffic inputs
        to the Single Airport Delay Model

        -   This change significantly affects the Take-off Guidance,
            Parallel Approach, and ILS Critical Area benefit estimates

    -   Incorporated FAA's 2004 Terminal Area Forecast traffic growth
        rates

    -   Included an estimate of downstream effects of disruptions

    -   Refined estimates of disruption costs

    -   Included a listing of aviation facilities within 23nm of each of
        the 120 candidate LAAS airports

-   Sensitivity Analyses Conducted to Evaluate Effects of Input Data
    Changes on Overall Benefits

    -   Disruption cost

    -   Minimum required avionics equipage

    -   LAAS equipage timing

-   Straight-in Approach Benefits

    -   Limited runway use to appropriate aircraft types

    -   Refined the runway usage estimates by assigning the majority of
        traffic to a primary runway

    -   Included VFR traffic in the demand/capacity ratio calculation

-   Take-off Guidance Benefits

    -   Extended the upper bound of low visibility conditions up to 1600
        RVR

    -   Weighted the results by probability of occurrence of low
        visibility conditions

    -   Refined the results by incorporating HUD equipage and assigning
        LAAS ½ credit for the benefits

-   Complex Procedure Benefits

    -   Refined the attribution of benefit to RNAV/RNP

    -   Limited benefit accrual to arrival runways without an ILS

    -   Limited most benefit accrual to the second half of the 20-year
        benefit period

-   ILS Critical Area Benefits

    -   Extended analysis of airborne benefit (reduced longitudinal
        spacing) to nine airports

    -   Added taxi-in and taxi-out benefit estimate

-   Parallel Approach Benefits

    -   Extended the analysis to eleven candidate airports

    -   Allocated ½ of the benefit to LAAS (½ of benefit given to
        required enabling technologies)

-   Additional appendices included at the request of reviewers

    -   NAS and User Baselines (from IBM November 2003 deliverable)

        -   NAS baseline systems

        -   System capabilities

        -   User baseline

# [Stakeholder Validation]{.smallcaps} 

An important activity between the time of the delivery of the February
2004 Preliminary Findings and this update was the validation of both the
methodology and specific key inputs with a wide range of service
provider and industry stakeholders. Feedback was obtained from written
comments provided by reviewers, from conference calls with principal
stakeholder groups, and from site visits to five key airports and
airlines. The purpose of these stakeholder validation meetings was to
communicate IBM's preliminary findings, to gain a better understanding
of current and expected air traffic operations from a variety of
viewpoints, and to explore how LAAS may provide additional benefit to
such operations.

Data gathered during these visits was used to either validate or correct
the methodology, the mathematical formulas, and specific critical inputs
that IBM is currently using to quantify the incremental benefits of
LAAS.

The IBM team wishes to thank the following organizations and individuals
for providing their insights, constructive criticism, and valuable
comments on our LAAS benefits analysis work. Appearance on this list is
an indication that each individual was afforded an opportunity to
comment on IBM's benefits analysis approach; it does not imply agreement
with IBM's approach.

An asterisk (\*) denotes a primary Point of Contact for each
organization.

### 

### Airport and Airline Site Visits

+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| **Visit  | **Or         | **Contact**  | **Position**               |
| Date**   | ganization** |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 02-      | Federal      | Cole, Ray    | Aircraft Standards         |
| Feb-2004 | Express      |              | Engineer                   |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 02-      | Federal      | Murdoch,     | \*Manager, Strategic       |
| Feb-2004 | Express      | Joel         | Projects                   |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 02-      | Federal      | Vail, Steve  | Senior Manager of Global   |
| Feb-2004 | Express      |              | Air Traffic                |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 03-      | Shelby       | White,       | \*Director of Operations   |
| Feb-2004 | County       | Walter       | and Public Safety          |
|          | Airport      |              |                            |
|          | Authority    |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 03-      | FAA          | Wertz, Bill  | \*MEM ATCT Manager         |
| Feb-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Ackland,     | \*Senior Technical Fellow  |
| May-2004 |              | John         | -- Airplane Systems        |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Alcabin,     | Principal Engineer         |
| May-2004 |              | Monica       |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Malsom, Don  | Associate Director         |
| May-2004 |              |              | Business Development --    |
|          |              |              | Air Traffic Management     |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Michael, Bob | Product Manager            |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
|          |              |              | Marketing & Business       |
|          |              |              | Strategy                   |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Siegmund,    | Program Manager,           |
| May-2004 |              | Paul         | Regulatory Affairs         |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Sipe, Alan   | \--                        |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Boeing       | Tuttle, Tim  | Program Manager,           |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
|          |              |              | Product Development        |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | FAA          | Beckerdite,  | \*SEA TRACON Facility      |
| May-2004 |              | Ron          | Manager                    |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | Seattle      | Kukillis,    | \*SEA Operations           |
| May-2004 | Tacoma       | Rob          | Development Manager,       |
|          | Airport      |              | Airfield                   |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 05-      | FAA          | Vernon,      | \*SEA ATCT Facility        |
| May-2004 |              | Kathryn      | Manager                    |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 06-      | Alaska       | Dalton,      | \* Director of Flight      |
| May-2004 | Airlines     | Sarah        | Operations                 |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 06-      | Horizon      | Solmonson,   | \*Manager Flight           |
| May-2004 | Airlines     | Perry        | Operations Technical       |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | BDL          | Tebbetts,    | BDL Ops Manager            |
| May-2004 |              | Rollin       |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | FAA          | Bellabona,   | Regional SR Ops Research   |
| May-2004 |              | Joseph       | Spc/ANE 520.6              |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | FAA          | Fiske, Gary  | \*BDL Tower/TRACON         |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | FAA          | Guiod, Mark  | BDL Air Traffic Manager    |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | FAA          | Hall, David  | Flight Standards -- NE     |
| May-2004 |              | L            | Region                     |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 19-      | FAA          | Gross, Stu   | EWR ATC                    |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 19-      | FAA          | Jenny, Al    | EWR ATC Manager            |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 19-      | FAA          | Sangs, Larry | EWR ATC                    |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 19-      | FAA          | Wagner, Mike | \*EWR ATC                  |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 20-      | FAA          | Kalpaxis,    | NATCA N90                  |
| May-2004 |              | Timon        |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 20-      | FAA          | Moss, Patti  | \*N90 Airspace             |
| May-2004 |              |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 20-      | NY,NJ Port   | Gatto, Ralph | \*Senior Airport Engineer  |
| May-2004 | Authority    |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 03-      | City of      | Foggia, John | Consultant                 |
| Jun-2004 | Chicago,     |              |                            |
|          | Dept of      |              |                            |
|          | Aviation     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 03-      | City of      | Santos, Joe  | \*Executive Assistant      |
| Jun-2004 | Chicago,     |              |                            |
|          | Dept of      |              |                            |
|          | Aviation     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 03-      | City of      | Bierbrodt,   | Consultant                 |
| Jun-2004 | Chicago,     | Jeffery      |                            |
|          | Dept of      |              |                            |
|          | Aviation     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 08-      | United       | Bass, Jim    | Manager, Capacity          |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | Enhancement                |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 08-      | United       | Burns, Joe   | Director, Flight Standards |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | and Technology             |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 08-      | United       | Haynes,      | Manager, Flight Operations |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | Brian        | Technology                 |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 08-      | United       | Holford, Tom | Manager, Navigation        |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | Upgrades                   |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 08-      | United       | Stone, Rocky | \*Manager, Flight Systems  |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | Technology                 |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 17-      | Continental  | Vaughn, Bill | \*Manager Advanced         |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | Navigation                 |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Crum, Greg   | Vice President Flight      |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              | Operations and Chief Pilot |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Edens, Dave  | Chief Pilot                |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Gleason,     | \* Director, Flight        |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | Brian        | Operations Technical       |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Haynes, Rob  | Regional Chief Pilot       |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Humphrey,    | Pilot                      |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | Stan D.      |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Johns, Frank | Air Traffic Coordinator    |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Mills, Phil  | Air Traffic Coordinator    |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     |              |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Stephens,    | Senior Financial Planning  |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | Jon          | Analyst                    |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Ward, Edward | Manager, Navigation Data   |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | T.           |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| 21-      | Southwest    | Wiecek,      | Flight Operations Engineer |
| Jun-2004 | Airlines     | Kevin        |                            |
+----------+--------------+--------------+----------------------------+

### 

### Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

The following individuals from the FAA, listed in alphabetical order by
organization, provided feedback to the February 2004 Preliminary
Findings:

  ---------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------
  **Organization**       **Contact**      **Position**

  FAA, AFS-430           Jarvis, Ed       Flight Standards

  FAA, AIR-130           Abduselam, Hamza Certification

  FAA, AIR-130           DeCleene, Bruce  Certification

  FAA, ATO-R             MacNeill, Ken    AT Requirements

  FAA, ATO-W             Peterson, Dave   OIT Team Lead

  FAA, ATO-W             Bell, Hal        WAAS PT Lead

  FAA, ATO-W/AMTI        Noto, John       WAAS Task Lead

  FAA, ATO-W/ESC/ARINC   Packard, Richard JPALS Liaison

  FAA, ATO-W/ISI         Lay, Richard     LAAS System Engineer
  ---------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------

### MITRE/CAASD

The following individuals from MITRE/CAASD, listed in alphabetical order
by last name, provided subject matter expertise, tools, data and
valuable feedback to the February 2004 Preliminary Findings:

  ------------------ ---------------- ------------------------------------
  **Organization**   **Contact**      **Position**

  MITRE/CAASD        Barrer, John     Lead Engineer

  MITRE/CAASD        Markin, Kelly    Program Manager

  MITRE/CAASD        Massimini, Vince Senior Principal Engineer

  MITRE/CAASD        Scales, Walt     Project Team Manager

  MITRE/CAASD        Swedish, William Principal Engineer
  ------------------ ---------------- ------------------------------------

### Preliminary Findings Conference Call with Major Airline Representatives, 15-April-2004

The following individuals, listed in alphabetical order by organization,
participated in a discussion of the February 2004 Preliminary Findings:

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ------------------------------------
  **Organization**                                                                                              **Contact**      **Position**

  Alaska Airlines                                                                                               Dalton, Sarah    Director of Flight Operations

  [American Trans                                                                                               Enias, James     Technical Pilot
  Air](http://rds.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=ATA+Airlines/v=2/SID=e/l=WS1/R=1/SS=4287501/H=0/*-http:/www.ata.com/)                    

  Boeing                                                                                                        Ackland, John    Senior Technical Fellow Airline
                                                                                                                                 System

  Continental Airlines                                                                                          Vaughn, Bill     Captain, Flight Technical

  Delta Airlines                                                                                                Speir, Ken       Fleet Technical Pilot

  Federal Express                                                                                               Murdock, Joel    Manager, Strategic Projects

  Honeywell                                                                                                     Hoodspith, Mike  Manager, Satellite Landing Systems,
                                                                                                                                 Commercial Products, Asia, Latin
                                                                                                                                 America & Western U.S.

  Horizon Airlines                                                                                              Bush, Steve      Flight Ops Technical

  JetBlue Airways                                                                                               Somerville,      Captain, GPS/RNAV Subject Matter
                                                                                                                Donald           Specialist

  Northwest Airlines                                                                                            Alexander, Frank Chief Pilot Technical Programs

  United Airlines                                                                                               Stone, Rocky     Manager of Flight Systems Technology

  United Parcel Service                                                                                         Hilb, Bob        Manager of Advanced Flight Systems
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ------------------------------------

### GBAS FAA-Europe Coordination Meeting, April-27 to 29, 2004

The following participants provided a review of the IBM February 2004
Preliminary Findings:

  ------------------ ------------------ ---------------------------------
  **Organization**   **Contact**        **Position**

  EUROCONTROL        Grand-Perret,      \*Expert -- Navigation
                     Sylvie             

  SKYGUIDE           Berz, Gerhard      \*System Engineer, Satellite
                                        Navigation

  SOFREAVIA          De La Burgade,     Consulting Division, Project
                     Olivier            Manager
  ------------------ ------------------ ---------------------------------

# [Important Considerations for Interpreting Results]{.smallcaps}

This section describes several important points about the estimates of
LAAS benefits in this study. The points presented below are described
here to highlight their importance and to foster discussion of their
treatment in this study. IBM welcomes discussion of these, and any other
issues, that may impact the benefits estimates.

-   Estimates of the cost of flight disruptions are central to this
    study. IBM has worked to ensure that the most credible and
    applicable estimates are used here, and has validated these
    estimates with industry stakeholders. However, there is substantial
    uncertainty inherent in any estimate of such complex events. Changes
    to these key cost inputs, particularly unforeseen systematic changes
    over time, could significantly alter these LAAS benefits estimates.
    The cost of disruptions is included in the sensitivity study in this
    update to the efficiency benefits.

-   Estimates of traffic increases over the 20 year period are central
    to this study. While IBM has worked to ensure that the most credible
    and applicable estimates are used here, there is substantial
    uncertainty in any forecast covering such a long time period. As a
    consequence, this study shares the forecast risks identified in the
    FAA's 2004 Terminal Area Forecast documentation[^8]. Changes to the
    forecasts, whether due to unforeseen economic events, world
    political events, or airline industry structural changes, could
    significantly alter the basis on which these LAAS benefits are
    founded.

-   Flight disruptions of the kind studied here are not isolated events.
    In general, a single flight disruption may have an impact on other
    flight operations. This connection between disruptions can be
    accounted for either by formally modeling the network effects that
    link flight operations, or by adding a factor for "downstream"
    effects.

    -   Network effects are not included in these preliminary findings.
        That is, the impact of a reduced rate of operations at one
        airport is viewed in these analyses as independent from the
        operations at other airports. In reality, a weather-related
        disruption at one airport, particularly an airline's hub, can
        have substantial detrimental effects throughout that airline's
        network.

    -   In this update to the preliminary findings, downstream effects
        of a flight disruption are accounted for through a factor of 1.5
        times the initial disruption. The specific value chosen for this
        factor has a substantial impact on total benefits. The estimate
        used here is based on published research and FAA guidance[^9] on
        the downstream effects of delays, the single most common form of
        disruption. The assumed factor of 1.5 is near the low end of the
        range of published downstream delay factors, which range from
        1.0 to over 7, depending on the magnitude of the original delay
        and the time of day at which it occurs. Additionally, we
        recognize that a single factor may not apply to all user groups.
        Due to the relative importance of this factor, and the
        uncertainty surrounding its proper value, the final report will
        include downstream effects in the sensitivity analysis.

-   Based on assumptions, like IOC dates, the ground facility
    installation schedule, avionics equipage rates, and minimum required
    avionics equipage, benefits accrual at each airport takes place over
    a subset of the full 20 year period. For this reason total numbers
    in this report cannot be divided by 20 to obtain average annual
    benefits.

-   The pace of development and certification of procedures, both for
    LAAS and for other advanced systems in the Baseline (*e.g.*, those
    with few currently existing procedures, like LPV) will be a key
    driver of benefits. At the beginning of this analysis, IBM and the
    FAA made the simplifying assumption that procedures would be
    available within four months of each system's IOC. This assumption
    allows benefits to be calculated without the added complexity of
    considering procedure development schedules. However, this
    assumption also represents a real and potentially significant source
    of uncertainty in the benefits estimates in this study.

-   Delay in the development and fielding of LAAS could cause
    significant changes to the benefit estimates. This is a particular
    concern with regard to LAAS Cat II/III capability, which is
    currently assumed, in this study, to be available beginning in 2013.
    Any delay to this start date without an associated extension of the
    end of the benefit study period is likely to have a significant
    negative impact on LAAS benefit estimates.

-   The pace and extent of LAAS equipage among airlines will be a key
    driver for LAAS benefits. In this report, IBM has assumed a certain
    rate of equipage, based on feedback received from airline operations
    representatives. If the actual rate of equipage is either faster or
    slower than assumed, benefits due to LAAS may be significantly
    impacted. Similarly, if the extent of LAAS equipage differs
    substantially from that assumed, benefits due to LAAS may be
    significantly impacted. The rate of LAAS equipage is included in the
    sensitivity analysis in this update to the efficiency benefits.

-   LAAS benefits may not accrue until a substantial proportion of the
    user base is equipped. The introduction of any new technology such
    as LAAS into a system as complex as the NAS may not yield benefits
    proportional to either the number of ground systems or avionics
    installed. Due to the difficulties of providing air traffic control
    services to aircraft equipped with a mix of capabilities, some
    benefits of LAAS may not be achieved until a large proportion of the
    aircraft serving a particular airport are LAAS-equipped. For
    example, the elimination of ILS critical areas may not be possible
    while a fraction of arriving aircraft still require protection of
    the ILS signal for precision approach in IMC. Other LAAS
    capabilities, such as support of low RNP procedures in the terminal
    area may not be as affected by this issue. The minimum level of LAAS
    equipage for benefit accrual is included in the sensitivity analysis
    in this update to the efficiency benefits.

-   Current guidance from FAA suggests that LAAS approaches will use the
    ILS TERPS surfaces. While this may be necessary for the initial
    transition from ILS to LAAS-based approaches, it may also limit the
    benefit to be gained. Precision approaches using TERPS surfaces
    designed specifically for LAAS may result in lower approach minima
    than are currently permitted when ILS surfaces are used.

-   Changes to the assumed rate of installation of LAAS ground
    facilities will have a substantial impact on estimated LAAS
    benefits. At the assumed 24 installations per year rate, all 120
    airports in this study can have a LAAS installed within five years
    of IOC. If the actual rate of installation is reduced, then the
    onset of benefit accumulation will be delayed for many airports,
    with an associated reduction in overall benefits for the 20 year
    period.

-   Benefits of LAAS-based complex approaches are constrained by the
    existence of other avionics and ground systems that provide similar
    capability. However, this does not take into account some advantages
    of LAAS that may prove operationally valuable, such as the ability
    of LAAS to improve the availability of actual navigation perfomance
    (in order to meet RNP) or the simplicity of using LAAS as a single
    system for terminal area navigation through precision approach and
    landing.

#  

# [Efficiency Benefits]{.smallcaps}

## [Summary of Efficiency Benefits]{.smallcaps} 

Table 1 shows the total 20 year discounted[^10] efficiency benefits
estimated for all 120 airports. Tables A, B, and C show the best
estimate, 5^th^ and 95^th^ percentiles, respectively. The percentiles
are obtained through the sensitivity analysis which evaluates the impact
on benefits of the variability in three key input parameters: cost of
disruptions, pace of LAAS equipage, and minimum required equipage for
benefit accrual. See Appendix D for details of the sensitivity analysis.
Further tables in this paper report only the best estimate values.

Benefits are shown for both reduced direct operating costs and passenger
time savings. These are reported separately here and in subsequent
tables so that readers can easily distinguish the magnitude of benefits
accruing to these two distinct stakeholder groups.

User decisions regarding WAAS avionics equipage are a key element in
estimating LAAS benefits. In order to place bounds on this element for
the preliminary findings, IBM agreed to state LAAS benefits for two
extreme cases: no WAAS equipage by any users, and full WAAS equipage by
all users. While neither of these two cases is likely to be realistic,
together, they provide an upper and lower bound for LAAS benefits
relative to WAAS equipage. Thus, in Table 1 and subsequent tables in
this paper, benefits are shown for the two alternative cases of user
equipage with WAAS: assuming no WAAS equipage by users ("0% WAAS"), and
assuming full WAAS equipage by users ("100% WAAS").

[Table 1a: Discounted 20 year LAAS Efficiency Benefits -- Best
Estimate]{.smallcaps}

+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|                       | **Direct Operating   | **Passenger Time     |
|                       | Cost**               | Savings**            |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$997,000,000        | \$994,500,000        |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS   |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$680,200,000        | \$663,800,000        |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 100% WAAS |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

[Table 1b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Efficiency Benefits -- 5^th^
Percentile]{.smallcaps}

+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|                       | **Direct Operating   | **Passenger Time     |
|                       | Cost**               | Savings**            |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$971,000,000        | \$981,600,000        |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS   |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$649,600,000        | \$643,000,000        |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 100% WAAS |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

[Table 1c: Discounted 20 year LAAS Efficiency Benefits -- 95^th^
Percentile]{.smallcaps}

+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|                       | **Direct Operating   | **Passenger Time     |
|                       | Cost**               | Savings**            |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$1,107,800,000      | \$1,118,200,000      |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS   |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$765,200,000        | \$754,500,000        |
|                       |                      |                      |
| **(Assuming 100% WAAS |                      |                      |
| equipage)**           |                      |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

Table 2 shows the total 20 year discounted efficiency benefits by user
group. Table 2A lists direct operating cost benefits, and Table 2B lists
passenger time savings. Further details of benefits by user group,
listed by airport, are in Appendix J.

### Benefits by User Group

[Table 2a: Discounted 20 year LAAS Operating Cost Efficiency Benefits --
by User Group]{.smallcaps}[^11]

+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
|              | Major    | Regional | Cargo    | C        | Other GA |
|              | P        | P        | Carriers | orporate | O        |
|              | assenger | assenger |          | Jet GA   | perators |
|              | Airlines | Airlines |          | O        |          |
|              |          |          |          | perators |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| **LAAS       | \$687    | \$182    | \$45     | \$77     | \$5      |
| Benefits**   | ,000,000 | ,600,000 | ,000,000 | ,300,000 | ,100,000 |
|              |          |          |          |          |          |
| (Assuming 0% |          |          |          |          |          |
| WAAS         |          |          |          |          |          |
| equipage)    |          |          |          |          |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| **LAAS       | \$481    | \$116    | \$29     | \$51     | \        |
| Benefits**   | ,800,000 | ,200,000 | ,600,000 | ,800,000 | $700,000 |
|              |          |          |          |          |          |
| (Assuming    |          |          |          |          |          |
| 100% WAAS    |          |          |          |          |          |
| equipage)    |          |          |          |          |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+

[Table 2b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Passenger Time Savings Efficiency
Benefits -- by User Group]{.smallcaps}

+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
|              | Major    | Regional | Cargo    | C        | Other GA |
|              | P        | P        | Carriers | orporate | O        |
|              | assenger | assenger |          | Jet GA   | perators |
|              | Airlines | Airlines |          | O        |          |
|              |          |          |          | perators |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| **LAAS       | \$612    | \$365    | \$0      | \$14     | \$1      |
| Benefits**   | ,900,000 | ,400,000 |          | ,500,000 | ,700,000 |
|              |          |          |          |          |          |
| (Assuming 0% |          |          |          |          |          |
| WAAS         |          |          |          |          |          |
| equipage)    |          |          |          |          |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| **LAAS       | \$415    | \$238    | \$0      | \$9      | \        |
| Benefits**   | ,300,000 | ,400,000 |          | ,900,000 | $200,000 |
|              |          |          |          |          |          |
| (Assuming    |          |          |          |          |          |
| 100% WAAS    |          |          |          |          |          |
| equipage)    |          |          |          |          |          |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+

### Benefits by Efficiency Benefit Categories and by Airport

The LAAS efficiency benefits estimated in this report are attributable
to each of the five quantified efficiency benefit categories:

1.  Straight-in Approaches

2.  Takeoff Guidance

3.  Complex Procedures

4.  ILS Critical Area Elimination

5.  Parallel Approaches

The pie charts in Figure 1 show the proportion of benefit attributable
to each of the five quantified efficiency benefit categories, for the
best estimate, as summarized in Table 1A. Tables 3 and 4 list these
benefits for each of the120 airports.

### ![](media/image3.wmf){width="3.604724409448819in" height="1.5633858267716536in"}![](media/image4.wmf){width="3.236220472440945in" height="1.5633858267716536in"}

### ![](media/image5.wmf){width="3.604724409448819in" height="1.5633858267716536in"}![](media/image6.wmf){width="3.236220472440945in" height="1.5633858267716536in"}

### [Figure 1. proportion of the Discounted 20 year LAAS Best Estimate Benefits Attributable to each of the Five Quantified Efficiency Benefit Categories]{.smallcaps} 

### Estimated LAAS Benefits Assuming No User Equipage with WAAS

Tables 3A and 3B show the 20 year discounted efficiency benefits, by
airport, for the scenario in which users do not equip with WAAS. These
values provide the upper bound of estimated LAAS benefits relative to
WAAS equipage by users. User operating cost benefits are shown in Table
3A, and passenger time savings are shown in Table 3B. Each airport's
rank in terms of total benefit is shown in the third column. In addition
to total benefit at each airport, the contribution to the total from
each separate efficiency benefit category is shown.

[Table 3a: Discounted 20 year LAAS operating cost Benefits -- 0% waas
equipage scenario, by Airport]{.smallcaps}

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --------------- -------------- -------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   **Straight-In   **Takeoff      **Complex       **ILS Critical **Parallel
                Benefit**       Total       Approach**      Guidance**     Approach**      Area**         Approach**
                                Benefit**                                                                 

  ABQ           \$1,915,000     87          \$1,824,000     \$91,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  ACK           \$15,486,000    19          \$15,486,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  AFW           \$188,000       114         \$188,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ALB           \$9,665,000     34          \$4,998,000     \$470,000      \$4,197,000     \$0            \$0

  ANC           \$9,342,000     36          \$9,342,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ATL           \$38,082,000    4           \$30,703,000    \$0            \$0             \$7,379,000    \$0

  AUS           \$5,116,000     58          \$5,116,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  AVL           \$2,537,000     82          \$2,310,000     \$227,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  BDL           \$15,778,000    18          \$6,325,000     \$0            \$9,453,000     \$0            \$0

  BFI           \$747,000       103         \$541,000       \$206,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  BGR           \$1,153,000     95          \$1,153,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  BHM           \$7,841,000     43          \$1,292,000     \$0            \$6,549,000     \$0            \$0

  BNA           \$3,069,000     74          \$3,069,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  BOI           \$4,930,000     60          \$4,930,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  BOS           \$13,169,000    22          \$13,169,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  BUF           \$6,461,000     51          \$6,451,000     \$10,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  BUR           \$39,750,000    2           \$6,476,000     \$127,000      \$33,147,000    \$0            \$0

  BWI           \$7,208,000     47          \$7,208,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CAE           \$2,068,000     86          \$2,068,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CHA           \$685,000       106         \$685,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CHS           \$4,906,000     61          \$4,906,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CLE           \$18,589,000    14          \$18,589,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CLT           \$17,696,000    15          \$17,696,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  CMH           \$4,608,000     65          \$4,292,000     \$316,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  COS           \$9,273,000     37          \$8,491,000     \$782,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  CVG           \$37,931,000    5           \$10,603,000    \$0            \$0             \$27,328,000   \$0

  DAB           \$872,000       101         \$723,000       \$149,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  DAL           \$4,408,000     68          \$3,532,000     \$876,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  DAY           \$2,905,000     76          \$2,797,000     \$0            \$0             \$108,000      \$0

  DCA           \$30,834,000    6           \$4,169,000     \$0            \$26,665,000    \$0            \$0

  DEN           \$21,234,000    12          \$21,234,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  DFW           \$53,557,000    1           \$23,874,000    \$0            \$0             \$29,683,000   \$0

  DLH           \$1,469,000     91          \$1,311,000     \$158,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  DSM           \$3,004,000     75          \$3,004,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  DTW           \$28,120,000    8           \$23,149,000    \$0            \$0             \$2,063,000    \$2,908,000

  DVT           \$8,000         120         \$8,000         \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ELP           \$13,000        119         \$0             \$13,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  EUG           \$3,886,000     70          \$3,368,000     \$518,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  EWR           \$12,102,000    24          \$12,102,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  EYW           \$99,000        117         \$99,000        \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  FAI           \$709,000       105         \$709,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  FAT           \$408,000       109         \$408,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  FLL           \$2,352,000     84          \$2,058,000     \$112,000      \$0             \$0            \$182,000

  FWA           \$2,581,000     81          \$2,562,000     \$19,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  FXE           \$105,000       116         \$96,000        \$9,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  GEG           \$7,226,000     46          \$7,226,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  GRR           \$6,266,000     52          \$5,790,000     \$476,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  GSO           \$11,775,000    26          \$11,775,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  GSP           \$1,282,000     92          \$1,282,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  HNL           \$4,525,000     67          \$46,000        \$0            \$4,479,000     \$0            \$0

  HOU           \$14,845,000    21          \$12,347,000    \$2,498,000    \$0             \$0            \$0

  HPN           \$7,740,000     44          \$4,804,000     \$2,730,000    \$0             \$206,000      \$0

  HSV           \$390,000       110         \$390,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  IAD           \$9,237,000     38          \$9,237,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  IAH           \$19,545,000    13          \$18,608,000    \$0            \$0             \$937,000      \$0

  ICT           \$5,343,000     56          \$5,343,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ILN           \$2,904,000     77          \$2,904,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  IND           \$3,413,000     71          \$3,413,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  JAN           \$732,000       104         \$732,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  JAX           \$4,588,000     66          \$4,588,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  JFK           \$17,459,000    16          \$17,234,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$225,000

  JNU           \$24,577,000    11          \$0             \$52,000       \$24,525,000    \$0            \$0

  LAS           \$344,000       112         \$342,000       \$2,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  LAX           \$11,350,000    28          \$11,350,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  LCK           \$122,000       115         \$122,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$38,375,000    3           \$28,538,000    \$0            \$9,837,000     \$0            \$0

  LGB           \$6,197,000     53          \$3,142,000     \$792,000      \$0             \$0            \$2,263,000

  LIT           \$1,192,000     93          \$1,192,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  MCI           \$5,814,000     55          \$5,814,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  MCO           \$11,940,000    25          \$11,309,000    \$0            \$0             \$631,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,030,000     98          \$872,000       \$158,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  MDW           \$17,152,000    17          \$16,209,000    \$943,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  MEM           \$9,686,000     33          \$7,287,000     \$0            \$0             \$264,000      \$2,135,000

  MHT           \$11,619,000    27          \$11,305,000    \$314,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  MIA           \$2,840,000     78          \$2,840,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  MKE           \$12,799,000    23          \$12,465,000    \$0            \$0             \$176,000      \$158,000

  MMU           \$235,000       113         \$105,000       \$130,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  MSP           \$27,667,000    9           \$27,667,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  MSY           \$8,376,000     41          \$8,376,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  OAK           \$905,000       99          \$905,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  OKC           \$8,381,000     40          \$8,326,000     \$55,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  OMA           \$1,183,000     94          \$1,183,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ONT           \$6,665,000     50          \$6,665,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  ORD           \$29,996,000    7           \$29,525,000    \$0            \$0             \$471,000      \$0

  ORF           \$5,926,000     54          \$5,347,000     \$474,000      \$0             \$105,000      \$0

  PBI           \$1,508,000     90          \$1,427,000     \$81,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  PDX           \$4,134,000     69          \$4,086,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$48,000

  PHL           \$11,276,000    29          \$10,743,000    \$0            \$0             \$533,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,625,000     89          \$1,033,000     \$592,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  PIE           \$831,000       102         \$706,000       \$125,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  PIT           \$10,200,000    32          \$10,200,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  PVD           \$4,892,000     62          \$4,892,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  RDU           \$15,145,000    20          \$15,078,000    \$1,000        \$0             \$0            \$66,000

  RFD           \$899,000       100         \$899,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  RIC           \$7,425,000     45          \$7,389,000     \$0            \$0             \$36,000       \$0

  RNO           \$1,073,000     96          \$1,040,000     \$33,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  ROC           \$5,081,000     59          \$2,344,000     \$4,000        \$0             \$2,733,000    \$0

  RSW           \$7,078,000     48          \$5,867,000     \$1,211,000    \$0             \$0            \$0

  SAN           \$27,315,000    10          \$0             \$0            \$27,315,000    \$0            \$0

  SAT           \$8,588,000     39          \$8,478,000     \$110,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  SDF           \$439,000       108         \$439,000       \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  SEA           \$10,413,000    31          \$8,085,000     \$0            \$0             \$2,328,000    \$0

  SFB           \$366,000       111         \$314,000       \$52,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  SFO           \$5,194,000     57          \$5,194,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  SHV           \$1,818,000     88          \$1,818,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  SJC           \$9,481,000     35          \$8,615,000     \$866,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  SLC           \$4,771,000     63          \$3,328,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$1,443,000

  SMF           \$11,168,000    30          \$11,168,000    \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  SNA           \$2,379,000     83          \$1,027,000     \$1,352,000    \$0             \$0            \$0

  STL           \$6,931,000     49          \$6,929,000     \$2,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  SWF           \$644,000       107         \$634,000       \$10,000       \$0             \$0            \$0

  SYR           \$2,123,000     85          \$2,122,000     \$1,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  TEB           \$7,854,000     42          \$1,286,000     \$628,000      \$5,940,000     \$0            \$0

  TLH           \$4,666,000     64          \$4,265,000     \$401,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  TPA           \$2,738,000     79          \$2,738,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  TRI           \$1,068,000     97          \$1,068,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  TUL           \$3,294,000     73          \$3,294,000     \$0            \$0             \$0            \$0

  TUS           \$57,000        118         \$53,000        \$4,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  TYS           \$2,591,000     80          \$2,590,000     \$1,000        \$0             \$0            \$0

  VNY           \$3,411,000     72          \$3,263,000     \$148,000      \$0             \$0            \$0

  Total         \$996,976,000               \$742,131,000   \$18,329,000   \$152,107,000   \$74,981,000   \$9,428,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --------------- -------------- -------------

[Table 3b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Passenger Time savings -- 0% waas
equipage scenario, by Airport]{.smallcaps}

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --------------- --------------- -------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   **Straight-In   **Takeoff      **Complex       **ILS Critical  **Parallel
                Benefit**       Total       Approach**      Guidance**     Approach**      Area**          Approach**
                                Benefit**                                                                  

  ABQ           \$1,733,000     86          \$1,617,000     \$116,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  ACK           \$26,581,000    9           \$26,581,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  AFW           \$8,000         117         \$8,000         \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ALB           \$11,323,000    27          \$5,843,000     \$571,000      \$4,909,000     \$0             \$0

  ANC           \$6,932,000     44          \$6,932,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ATL           \$40,616,000    3           \$28,351,000    \$0            \$0             \$12,265,000    \$0

  AUS           \$3,927,000     66          \$3,927,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  AVL           \$2,996,000     71          \$2,824,000     \$172,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  BDL           \$13,885,000    22          \$5,565,000     \$0            \$8,320,000     \$0             \$0

  BFI           \$167,000       110         \$124,000       \$43,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  BGR           \$1,523,000     88          \$1,523,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  BHM           \$6,197,000     51          \$1,025,000     \$0            \$5,172,000     \$0             \$0

  BNA           \$2,734,000     75          \$2,734,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  BOI           \$5,145,000     58          \$5,145,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  BOS           \$14,069,000    21          \$14,069,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  BUF           \$6,523,000     45          \$6,510,000     \$13,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  BUR           \$31,454,000    5           \$5,072,000     \$162,000      \$26,220,000    \$0             \$0

  BWI           \$6,407,000     47          \$6,407,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CAE           \$2,264,000     83          \$2,264,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CHA           \$649,000       99          \$649,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CHS           \$5,584,000     55          \$5,584,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CLE           \$21,209,000    13          \$21,209,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CLT           \$16,885,000    19          \$16,885,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  CMH           \$4,543,000     62          \$4,225,000     \$318,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  COS           \$8,635,000     35          \$7,698,000     \$937,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  CVG           \$46,777,000    2           \$13,016,000    \$0            \$0             \$33,761,000    \$0

  DAB           \$601,000       103         \$513,000       \$88,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  DAL           \$2,944,000     72          \$2,297,000     \$647,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  DAY           \$2,774,000     74          \$2,666,000     \$0            \$0             \$108,000       \$0

  DCA           \$29,915,000    7           \$4,232,000     \$0            \$25,683,000    \$0             \$0

  DEN           \$20,503,000    14          \$20,503,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  DFW           \$70,062,000    1           \$23,078,000    \$0            \$0             \$46,984,000    \$0

  DLH           \$1,267,000     90          \$1,175,000     \$92,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  DSM           \$3,319,000     69          \$3,319,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  DTW           \$30,025,000    6           \$23,161,000    \$0            \$0             \$3,415,000     \$3,449,000

  DVT           \$1,000         118         \$1,000         \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        116         \$0             \$12,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  EUG           \$4,928,000     59          \$4,530,000     \$398,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  EWR           \$11,047,000    28          \$11,047,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  EYW           \$161,000       111         \$161,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  FAI           \$533,000       104         \$533,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  FAT           \$739,000       98          \$739,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  FLL           \$2,392,000     80          \$2,063,000     \$147,000      \$0             \$0             \$182,000

  FWA           \$3,057,000     70          \$3,051,000     \$6,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  FXE           \$19,000        115         \$17,000        \$2,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  GEG           \$7,058,000     40          \$7,058,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  GRR           \$6,426,000     46          \$6,096,000     \$330,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  GSO           \$11,341,000    25          \$11,341,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  GSP           \$1,653,000     87          \$1,653,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  HNL           \$6,951,000     43          \$67,000        \$0            \$6,884,000     \$0             \$0

  HOU           \$12,275,000    24          \$9,532,000     \$2,743,000    \$0             \$0             \$0

  HPN           \$5,344,000     57          \$3,881,000     \$1,272,000    \$0             \$191,000       \$0

  HSV           \$356,000       105         \$356,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  IAD           \$10,663,000    33          \$10,663,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  IAH           \$19,096,000    15          \$17,972,000    \$0            \$0             \$1,124,000     \$0

  ICT           \$3,678,000     68          \$3,678,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ILN           \$0             119         \$0             \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  IND           \$2,336,000     81          \$2,336,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  JAN           \$633,000       101         \$633,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  JAX           \$3,969,000     65          \$3,969,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  JFK           \$17,716,000    16          \$17,460,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$256,000

  JNU           \$26,198,000    11          \$0             \$54,000       \$26,144,000    \$0             \$0

  LAS           \$268,000       107         \$265,000       \$3,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  LAX           \$10,770,000    31          \$10,770,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  LCK           \$0             120         \$0             \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  LGA           \$39,060,000    4           \$29,049,000    \$0            \$10,011,000    \$0             \$0

  LGB           \$3,913,000     67          \$1,994,000     \$560,000      \$0             \$0             \$1,359,000

  LIT           \$817,000       97          \$817,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  MCI           \$5,583,000     56          \$5,583,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  MCO           \$12,591,000    23          \$11,630,000    \$0            \$0             \$961,000       \$0

  MDT           \$1,067,000     93          \$933,000       \$134,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  MDW           \$16,446,000    20          \$14,865,000    \$1,581,000    \$0             \$0             \$0

  MEM           \$7,817,000     37          \$5,535,000     \$0            \$0             \$209,000       \$2,073,000

  MHT           \$10,740,000    32          \$10,360,000    \$380,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  MIA           \$2,546,000     79          \$2,546,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  MKE           \$16,891,000    18          \$16,550,000    \$0            \$0             \$230,000       \$111,000

  MMU           \$50,000        113         \$19,000        \$31,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  MSP           \$26,432,000    10          \$26,432,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  MSY           \$6,990,000     42          \$6,990,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  OAK           \$638,000       100         \$638,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  OKC           \$7,502,000     38          \$7,447,000     \$55,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  OMA           \$940,000       95          \$940,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ONT           \$4,788,000     60          \$4,788,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  ORD           \$28,731,000    8           \$27,957,000    \$0            \$0             \$774,000       \$0

  ORF           \$6,337,000     49          \$5,674,000     \$560,000      \$0             \$103,000       \$0

  PBI           \$1,211,000     92          \$1,154,000     \$57,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  PDX           \$4,126,000     64          \$4,079,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$47,000

  PHL           \$10,813,000    30          \$10,021,000    \$0            \$0             \$792,000       \$0

  PHX           \$1,798,000     85          \$900,000       \$898,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  PIE           \$259,000       108         \$217,000       \$42,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  PIT           \$10,830,000    29          \$10,830,000    \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  PVD           \$6,155,000     52          \$6,155,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  RDU           \$17,550,000    17          \$17,500,000    \$1,000        \$0             \$0             \$49,000

  RFD           \$146,000       112         \$146,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  RIC           \$7,423,000     39          \$7,391,000     \$0            \$0             \$32,000        \$0

  RNO           \$861,000       96          \$823,000       \$38,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  ROC           \$5,984,000     53          \$2,467,000     \$4,000        \$0             \$3,513,000     \$0

  RSW           \$6,999,000     41          \$5,403,000     \$1,596,000    \$0             \$0             \$0

  SAN           \$24,122,000    12          \$0             \$0            \$24,122,000    \$0             \$0

  SAT           \$5,915,000     54          \$5,811,000     \$104,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  SDF           \$255,000       109         \$255,000       \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  SEA           \$11,330,000    26          \$8,318,000     \$0            \$0             \$3,012,000     \$0

  SFB           \$283,000       106         \$264,000       \$19,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  SFO           \$4,582,000     61          \$4,582,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  SHV           \$2,333,000     82          \$2,333,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  SJC           \$7,984,000     36          \$6,783,000     \$1,201,000    \$0             \$0             \$0

  SLC           \$4,539,000     63          \$3,077,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$1,462,000

  SMF           \$9,494,000     34          \$9,494,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  SNA           \$2,021,000     84          \$377,000       \$1,644,000    \$0             \$0             \$0

  STL           \$6,395,000     48          \$6,392,000     \$3,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  SWF           \$942,000       94          \$937,000       \$5,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  SYR           \$2,625,000     77          \$2,624,000     \$1,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  TEB           \$1,464,000     89          \$234,000       \$151,000      \$1,079,000     \$0             \$0

  TLH           \$6,311,000     50          \$6,046,000     \$265,000      \$0             \$0             \$0

  TPA           \$2,588,000     78          \$2,588,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  TRI           \$1,263,000     91          \$1,263,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  TUL           \$2,844,000     73          \$2,844,000     \$0            \$0             \$0             \$0

  TUS           \$43,000        114         \$39,000        \$4,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  TYS           \$2,726,000     76          \$2,725,000     \$1,000        \$0             \$0             \$0

  VNY           \$632,000       102         \$596,000       \$36,000       \$0             \$0             \$0

  Total         \$994,521,000               \$722,018,000   \$17,497,000   \$138,544,000   \$107,474,000   \$8,988,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --------------- --------------- -------------

###  Estimated LAAS Benefits Assuming Full User Equipage with WAAS

Tables 4A and 4B show the 20 year discounted efficiency benefits, by
airport, for the scenario in which users equip with WAAS. These values
provide the lower bound of estimated LAAS benefits relative to WAAS
equipage by users. User operating cost benefits are shown in Table 4A,
and passenger time savings are shown in Table 4B. Each airport's rank in
terms of total benefit is shown in the third column. In addition to
total benefit at each airport, the contribution to the total from each
separate efficiency benefit category is shown.

[Table 4a: Discounted 20 year LAAS operating cost Benefits -- 100% waas
equipage scenario, by Airport]{.smallcaps}

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   **Straight-In   **Takeoff      **Complex      **ILS Critical **Parallel
                Benefit**       Total       Approach**      Guidance**     Approach**     Area**         Approach**
                                Benefit**                                                                

  ABQ           \$1,052,000     90          \$961,000       \$91,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  ACK           \$10,645,000    20          \$10,645,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  AFW           \$188,000       112         \$188,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ALB           \$6,969,000     31          \$4,998,000     \$470,000      \$1,501,000    \$0            \$0

  ANC           \$5,864,000     38          \$5,864,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ATL           \$33,189,000    1           \$30,703,000    \$0            \$0            \$2,486,000    \$0

  AUS           \$5,116,000     46          \$5,116,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  AVL           \$2,537,000     70          \$2,310,000     \$227,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  BDL           \$5,358,000     44          \$3,557,000     \$0            \$1,801,000    \$0            \$0

  BFI           \$747,000       98          \$541,000       \$206,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  BGR           \$1,153,000     88          \$1,153,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BHM           \$1,710,000     76          \$1,292,000     \$0            \$418,000      \$0            \$0

  BNA           \$1,764,000     75          \$1,764,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BOI           \$3,441,000     59          \$3,441,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BOS           \$13,169,000    14          \$13,169,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BUF           \$6,084,000     37          \$6,074,000     \$10,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  BUR           \$1,283,000     83          \$92,000        \$127,000      \$1,064,000    \$0            \$0

  BWI           \$7,208,000     30          \$7,208,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CAE           \$1,375,000     80          \$1,375,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CHA           \$651,000       100         \$651,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CHS           \$3,642,000     57          \$3,642,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CLE           \$6,086,000     36          \$6,086,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CLT           \$17,696,000    8           \$17,696,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CMH           \$4,608,000     49          \$4,292,000     \$316,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  COS           \$8,379,000     27          \$7,597,000     \$782,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  CVG           \$16,161,000    10          \$10,603,000    \$0            \$0            \$5,558,000    \$0

  DAB           \$598,000       101         \$449,000       \$149,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  DAL           \$4,408,000     51          \$3,532,000     \$876,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  DAY           \$1,798,000     74          \$1,724,000     \$0            \$0            \$74,000       \$0

  DCA           \$5,483,000     42          \$3,917,000     \$0            \$1,566,000    \$0            \$0

  DEN           \$21,234,000    6           \$21,234,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  DFW           \$30,335,000    3           \$23,874,000    \$0            \$0            \$6,461,000    \$0

  DLH           \$1,397,000     79          \$1,239,000     \$158,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  DSM           \$1,846,000     73          \$1,846,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  DTW           \$15,308,000    11          \$13,226,000    \$0            \$0            \$2,063,000    \$19,000

  DVT           \$2,000         120         \$2,000         \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ELP           \$13,000        118         \$0             \$13,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  EUG           \$3,267,000     62          \$2,749,000     \$518,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  EWR           \$12,102,000    16          \$12,102,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  EYW           \$35,000        117         \$35,000        \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FAI           \$486,000       103         \$486,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FAT           \$247,000       110         \$247,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FLL           \$1,348,000     81          \$1,229,000     \$112,000      \$0            \$0            \$7,000

  FWA           \$1,088,000     89          \$1,069,000     \$19,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  FXE           \$57,000        116         \$48,000        \$9,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  GEG           \$5,498,000     41          \$5,498,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  GRR           \$4,425,000     50          \$3,949,000     \$476,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  GSO           \$11,775,000    17          \$11,775,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  GSP           \$1,282,000     84          \$1,282,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  HNL           \$136,000       113         \$46,000        \$0            \$90,000       \$0            \$0

  HOU           \$14,257,000    13          \$11,759,000    \$2,498,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  HPN           \$7,570,000     28          \$4,804,000     \$2,730,000    \$0            \$36,000       \$0

  HSV           \$390,000       106         \$390,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IAD           \$9,237,000     24          \$9,237,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IAH           \$19,545,000    7           \$18,608,000    \$0            \$0            \$937,000      \$0

  ICT           \$4,155,000     53          \$4,155,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ILN           \$2,904,000     65          \$2,904,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IND           \$3,413,000     60          \$3,413,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JAN           \$732,000       99          \$732,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JAX           \$3,835,000     55          \$3,835,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JFK           \$12,387,000    15          \$12,384,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$3,000

  JNU           \$799,000       97          \$0             \$52,000       \$747,000      \$0            \$0

  LAS           \$62,000        115         \$60,000        \$2,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  LAX           \$11,350,000    18          \$11,350,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  LCK           \$122,000       114         \$122,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$30,600,000    2           \$28,538,000    \$0            \$2,062,000    \$0            \$0

  LGB           \$2,953,000     64          \$1,940,000     \$792,000      \$0            \$0            \$221,000

  LIT           \$803,000       96          \$803,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MCI           \$5,814,000     40          \$5,814,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MCO           \$6,756,000     33          \$6,125,000     \$0            \$0            \$631,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,030,000     91          \$872,000       \$158,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MDW           \$16,989,000    9           \$16,046,000    \$943,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MEM           \$7,413,000     29          \$7,287,000     \$0            \$0            \$41,000       \$85,000

  MHT           \$9,484,000     22          \$9,170,000     \$314,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MIA           \$1,603,000     78          \$1,603,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MKE           \$5,367,000     43          \$5,177,000     \$0            \$0            \$176,000      \$14,000

  MMU           \$235,000       111         \$105,000       \$130,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MSP           \$27,667,000    5           \$27,667,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MSY           \$6,257,000     34          \$6,257,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  OAK           \$807,000       95          \$807,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  OKC           \$5,067,000     47          \$5,012,000     \$55,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  OMA           \$1,183,000     86          \$1,183,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ONT           \$3,098,000     63          \$3,098,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ORD           \$29,996,000    4           \$29,525,000    \$0            \$0            \$471,000      \$0

  ORF           \$5,848,000     39          \$5,347,000     \$474,000      \$0            \$27,000       \$0

  PBI           \$1,018,000     92          \$937,000       \$81,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  PDX           \$4,088,000     54          \$4,086,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$2,000

  PHL           \$10,845,000    19          \$10,312,000    \$0            \$0            \$533,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,625,000     77          \$1,033,000     \$592,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  PIE           \$483,000       104         \$358,000       \$125,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  PIT           \$10,200,000    21          \$10,200,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  PVD           \$3,690,000     56          \$3,690,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  RDU           \$15,084,000    12          \$15,078,000    \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$5,000

  RFD           \$304,000       109         \$304,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  RIC           \$4,664,000     48          \$4,646,000     \$0            \$0            \$18,000       \$0

  RNO           \$497,000       102         \$464,000       \$33,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  ROC           \$2,842,000     67          \$2,236,000     \$4,000        \$0            \$602,000      \$0

  RSW           \$6,093,000     35          \$4,882,000     \$1,211,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  SAN           \$2,692,000     68          \$0             \$0            \$2,692,000    \$0            \$0

  SAT           \$8,588,000     25          \$8,478,000     \$110,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  SDF           \$439,000       105         \$439,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SEA           \$9,416,000     23          \$8,085,000     \$0            \$0            \$1,331,000    \$0

  SFB           \$333,000       107         \$281,000       \$52,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  SFO           \$5,194,000     45          \$5,194,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SHV           \$1,003,000     93          \$1,003,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SJC           \$4,361,000     52          \$3,495,000     \$866,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  SLC           \$3,376,000     61          \$3,328,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$48,000

  SMF           \$8,382,000     26          \$8,382,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SNA           \$1,912,000     72          \$560,000       \$1,352,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  STL           \$6,931,000     32          \$6,929,000     \$2,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  SWF           \$330,000       108         \$320,000       \$10,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  SYR           \$1,241,000     85          \$1,240,000     \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  TEB           \$2,099,000     71          \$1,178,000     \$628,000      \$293,000      \$0            \$0

  TLH           \$3,594,000     58          \$3,193,000     \$401,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  TPA           \$1,168,000     87          \$1,168,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TRI           \$1,003,000     94          \$1,003,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TUL           \$2,856,000     66          \$2,856,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TUS           \$4,000         119         \$0             \$4,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  TYS           \$2,591,000     69          \$2,590,000     \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  VNY           \$1,290,000     82          \$1,142,000     \$148,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  Total         \$680,207,000               \$627,795,000   \$18,329,000   \$12,234,000   \$21,445,000   \$404,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------

[Table 4b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Passenger Time savings -- 100% waas
equipage scenario, by Airport]{.smallcaps}

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   **Straight-In   **Takeoff      **Complex      **ILS Critical **Parallel
                Benefit**       Total       Approach**      Guidance**     Approach**     Area**         Approach**
                                Benefit**                                                                

  ABQ           \$962,000       89          \$846,000       \$116,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  ACK           \$17,211,000    10          \$17,211,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  AFW           \$8,000         116         \$8,000         \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ALB           \$8,169,000     25          \$5,843,000     \$571,000      \$1,755,000    \$0            \$0

  ANC           \$4,425,000     48          \$4,425,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ATL           \$32,483,000    2           \$28,351,000    \$0            \$0            \$4,132,000    \$0

  AUS           \$3,927,000     56          \$3,927,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  AVL           \$2,996,000     61          \$2,824,000     \$172,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  BDL           \$4,715,000     43          \$3,130,000     \$0            \$1,585,000    \$0            \$0

  BFI           \$167,000       108         \$124,000       \$43,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  BGR           \$1,523,000     75          \$1,523,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BHM           \$1,363,000     80          \$1,025,000     \$0            \$338,000      \$0            \$0

  BNA           \$1,488,000     77          \$1,488,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BOI           \$3,516,000     57          \$3,516,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BOS           \$14,069,000    14          \$14,069,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  BUF           \$6,216,000     34          \$6,203,000     \$13,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  BUR           \$1,031,000     88          \$26,000        \$162,000      \$843,000      \$0            \$0

  BWI           \$6,407,000     31          \$6,407,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CAE           \$1,497,000     76          \$1,497,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CHA           \$642,000       94          \$642,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CHS           \$4,146,000     51          \$4,146,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CLE           \$7,169,000     27          \$7,169,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CLT           \$16,885,000    11          \$16,885,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  CMH           \$4,543,000     47          \$4,225,000     \$318,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  COS           \$7,745,000     26          \$6,808,000     \$937,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  CVG           \$19,652,000    7           \$13,016,000    \$0            \$0            \$6,636,000    \$0

  DAB           \$405,000       100         \$317,000       \$88,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  DAL           \$2,944,000     62          \$2,297,000     \$647,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  DAY           \$1,682,000     73          \$1,608,000     \$0            \$0            \$74,000       \$0

  DCA           \$5,316,000     39          \$3,810,000     \$0            \$1,506,000    \$0            \$0

  DEN           \$20,503,000    6           \$20,503,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  DFW           \$33,321,000    1           \$23,078,000    \$0            \$0            \$10,243,000   \$0

  DLH           \$1,254,000     82          \$1,162,000     \$92,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  DSM           \$1,835,000     69          \$1,835,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  DTW           \$16,168,000    13          \$12,751,000    \$0            \$0            \$3,415,000    \$2,000

  DVT           \$0             118         \$0             \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        114         \$0             \$12,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  EUG           \$3,981,000     54          \$3,583,000     \$398,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  EWR           \$11,047,000    18          \$11,047,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  EYW           \$51,000        110         \$51,000        \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FAI           \$458,000       97          \$458,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FAT           \$435,000       98          \$435,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  FLL           \$1,343,000     81          \$1,195,000     \$147,000      \$0            \$0            \$1,000

  FWA           \$1,095,000     86          \$1,089,000     \$6,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  FXE           \$11,000        115         \$9,000         \$2,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  GEG           \$5,123,000     42          \$5,123,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  GRR           \$4,423,000     49          \$4,093,000     \$330,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  GSO           \$11,341,000    17          \$11,341,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  GSP           \$1,653,000     74          \$1,653,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  HNL           \$220,000       107         \$67,000        \$0            \$153,000      \$0            \$0

  HOU           \$11,687,000    16          \$8,944,000     \$2,743,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  HPN           \$5,187,000     40          \$3,881,000     \$1,272,000    \$0            \$34,000       \$0

  HSV           \$356,000       102         \$356,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IAD           \$10,663,000    21          \$10,663,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IAH           \$19,096,000    8           \$17,972,000    \$0            \$0            \$1,124,000    \$0

  ICT           \$2,794,000     63          \$2,794,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ILN           \$0             119         \$0             \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  IND           \$2,336,000     67          \$2,336,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JAN           \$633,000       95          \$633,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JAX           \$3,304,000     58          \$3,304,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JFK           \$11,697,000    15          \$11,697,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  JNU           \$853,000       91          \$0             \$54,000       \$799,000      \$0            \$0

  LAS           \$50,000        111         \$47,000        \$3,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  LAX           \$10,770,000    20          \$10,770,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  LCK           \$0             120         \$0             \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$31,145,000    3           \$29,049,000    \$0            \$2,096,000    \$0            \$0

  LGB           \$1,823,000     71          \$1,236,000     \$560,000      \$0            \$0            \$27,000

  LIT           \$657,000       93          \$657,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MCI           \$5,583,000     37          \$5,583,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MCO           \$6,892,000     30          \$5,931,000     \$0            \$0            \$961,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,067,000     87          \$933,000       \$134,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MDW           \$16,416,000    12          \$14,835,000    \$1,581,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  MEM           \$5,578,000     38          \$5,535,000     \$0            \$0            \$33,000       \$10,000

  MHT           \$8,783,000     24          \$8,403,000     \$380,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  MIA           \$1,423,000     79          \$1,423,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MKE           \$7,113,000     28          \$6,881,000     \$0            \$0            \$230,000      \$2,000

  MMU           \$50,000        112         \$19,000        \$31,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  MSP           \$26,432,000    5           \$26,432,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  MSY           \$5,173,000     41          \$5,173,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  OAK           \$571,000       96          \$571,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  OKC           \$4,305,000     50          \$4,250,000     \$55,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  OMA           \$940,000       90          \$940,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ONT           \$2,263,000     68          \$2,263,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  ORD           \$28,731,000    4           \$27,957,000    \$0            \$0            \$774,000      \$0

  ORF           \$6,260,000     33          \$5,674,000     \$560,000      \$0            \$26,000       \$0

  PBI           \$754,000       92          \$697,000       \$57,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  PDX           \$4,079,000     53          \$4,079,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  PHL           \$10,362,000    22          \$9,570,000     \$0            \$0            \$792,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,798,000     72          \$900,000       \$898,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  PIE           \$158,000       109         \$116,000       \$42,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  PIT           \$10,830,000    19          \$10,830,000    \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  PVD           \$4,133,000     52          \$4,133,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  RDU           \$17,502,000    9           \$17,500,000    \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$1,000

  RFD           \$40,000        113         \$40,000        \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  RIC           \$4,661,000     44          \$4,645,000     \$0            \$0            \$16,000       \$0

  RNO           \$404,000       101         \$366,000       \$38,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  ROC           \$3,139,000     59          \$2,366,000     \$4,000        \$0            \$769,000      \$0

  RSW           \$6,093,000     35          \$4,497,000     \$1,596,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  SAN           \$2,381,000     65          \$0             \$0            \$2,381,000    \$0            \$0

  SAT           \$5,915,000     36          \$5,811,000     \$104,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  SDF           \$255,000       105         \$255,000       \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SEA           \$10,248,000    23          \$8,318,000     \$0            \$0            \$1,930,000    \$0

  SFB           \$277,000       104         \$258,000       \$19,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  SFO           \$4,582,000     46          \$4,582,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SHV           \$1,164,000     84          \$1,164,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SJC           \$3,953,000     55          \$2,752,000     \$1,201,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  SLC           \$3,083,000     60          \$3,077,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$6,000

  SMF           \$7,072,000     29          \$7,072,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  SNA           \$1,833,000     70          \$189,000       \$1,644,000    \$0            \$0            \$0

  STL           \$6,395,000     32          \$6,392,000     \$3,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  SWF           \$339,000       103         \$334,000       \$5,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  SYR           \$1,427,000     78          \$1,426,000     \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  TEB           \$418,000       99          \$214,000       \$151,000      \$53,000       \$0            \$0

  TLH           \$4,589,000     45          \$4,324,000     \$265,000      \$0            \$0            \$0

  TPA           \$1,105,000     85          \$1,105,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TRI           \$1,223,000     83          \$1,223,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TUL           \$2,379,000     66          \$2,379,000     \$0            \$0            \$0            \$0

  TUS           \$4,000         117         \$0             \$4,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  TYS           \$2,726,000     64          \$2,725,000     \$1,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  VNY           \$245,000       106         \$209,000       \$36,000       \$0            \$0            \$0

  Total         \$663,773,000               \$603,529,000   \$17,497,000   \$11,509,000   \$31,189,000   \$49,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------

##  Reduced Disruptions for Straight-in Precision Approaches

In the LAAS Navigation Capabilities Baseline[^12], IBM identified a set
of operational capabilities for which LAAS is expected to provide a
benefit. Two of these operational capabilities are precision approaches
down to Cat I minima and Cat II/III minima, respectively. The
operational justification for the benefits arises from the expectation
that 1) LAAS Cat I will reduce the landing minima at runways without Cat
I service and 2) LAAS Cat II/III will reduce minima at runways without a
corresponding ILS Cat II or III capability.

In instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), if a runway has no
precision approach, instrument approaches must be conducted using
non-precision approach (NPA) procedures. The minima for such procedures
are typically a ceiling of 400 to 500 feet and 1 mile visibility
(without approach lights). LAAS Cat I is expected to be able to support
precision approaches down to a 200 foot Decision Height (DH) and 1/2
mile visibility (with approach lights). This lowering of minima can
result in fewer 1) flight cancellations, 2) diversions to alternate
airports, and 3) delays, all of which can occur when a pilot cannot see
the runway at the decision height or the airport shuts down the runway
due to visibility below minima for the available approaches. These types
of disruptions can be very costly to the users, particularly the
scheduled airlines, and can lead to major problems at the local airport
as well as regionally or even nationally. Further, assuming that a LAAS
Cat II capability is developed that meets the more stringent performance
requirements for Cat II operations, it will be possible to achieve a
ceiling/visibility reduction down to a 100 foot DH and 1200 foot runway
visual range (RVR) (with lights and other supporting infrastructure).
Similarly, further development is expected to result in LAAS achieving
Cat III minima.

In this section, we describe the methodology that IBM used to calculate
the monetary value of the benefit achieved for straight-in approaches
from a reduction in disrupted flights. The methodology is based on
analytical approaches used to derive similar benefits for the Microwave
Landing System[^13] and for the European Geostationary Navigation
Overlay Service (EGNOS)[^14]. Note that although the methodology is
being described for straight-in approaches, it was also used to
calculate the benefits from complex approaches, assuming that these
approaches result in further reductions in approach minima (*e.g.,* by
achieving separation from obstacles which currently limit straight-in
approach minima) and they are approved for LAAS by the FAA.

Although the horizontal and vertical navigational accuracy achieved with
LAAS is expected to be greater than that obtained with ILS[^15], the FAA
has decided to use the ILS Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)
criteria for initial LAAS approach implementations. This will result in
the approach minima being the same for both ILS and LAAS. If the TERPS
surfaces are later adjusted to take advantage of the improved accuracy
of LAAS, either for the approach or the missed approach segments, the
associated minima may be reduced below the minima for ILS. Consequently,
for this analysis of straight-in approach benefits, LAAS was assumed to
offer no improvement over existing ILS minima.

### Derivation of the Mathematical Formula for Calculating Benefits

### Preprocessing Step 

The derivation of the mathematical formula begins with a preprocessing
step to tailor the list of runways considered in the analysis to include
only those that are appropriate candidates for LAAS benefits. There are
a total of 704 runways at the 120 airports selected for this study.
Runways that are not eligible candidates for possible improvement from
LAAS Cat I or Cat II/III are discarded from consideration. These
eliminated runways include the following:

-   Runways not currently used, or planned to be used, for arrivals

-   Runways that are less than 4200 feet in length, the shortest
    acceptable runway length for a precision approach

-   For LAAS Cat I, all runways equipped with an ILS Cat I, II, or III,
    since as was mentioned above LAAS is not expected to offer any
    improvement in these circumstances

-   For LAAS Cat II/III, all runways equipped with a Cat II or III ILS

### In addition to the elimination of these runways from consideration, it is important to also remove any airport, along with its associated runways, if the demand for runway resources is sufficiently less than the IMC capacity of the airport. 

There are several possible methods for calculating the demand/capacity
ratio of any airport. IBM has selected the following approach for its
simplicity and availability of relevant data:

-   For each airport, determine the maximum sustainable arrival
    throughput during different weather conditions using Enhanced
    Traffic Management System (ETMS) traffic data and National Climatic
    Data Center (NCDC) weather data for CY2000. Since VFR flights are
    not captured in ETMS data, this method is not applicable to a few
    airports that have significant VFR traffic (*e.g.*, ACK).

-   Calculate the percent drop in observed throughput from VMC to IMC
    for each airport. A previous IBM analysis that calculated
    theoretical throughput change from VMC to IMC found that up to a 9%
    drop is expected based solely on required changes in longitudinal
    separations between arrivals. Thus, an observed drop of 10% or
    greater is likely to be associated with operational issues that LAAS
    may be able to address.

-   If the airport's throughput drops by less than 10% from VMC to IMC,
    then there is considered to be little that LAAS can provide as an
    incremental benefit from reduced straight-in disruptions. This
    airport and its associated runways are removed from consideration.

### Mathematical Formulation of the Benefits Derived from Lower Approach Minima

To quantify the benefits that may be achieved by LAAS from the reduction
in arrival disruptions due to lower approach minima, we need to derive
two values:

1.  the number of disruptions avoidable with LAAS and

2.  the monetary savings obtained from each avoided disruption.

The product of these two values yields the benefit that can be expected
from the lower minima achievable with LAAS over what is possible with
the baseline systems (see Appendix F for a listing of baseline systems).
In this report, it is assumed that the baseline consists of existing and
planned technologies, and does not include those that might be
justified, but are not currently included in the FAA's plans (*e.g.*,
expanded installation of ILS at a variety of locations). The total
benefit is obtained by summing this product over three dimensions:

1.  each year in the 20-year time horizon of this study,

2.  each runway that passed successfully through the preprocessing
    filter described above, and

3.  all user groups (*i.e.*, major passenger airlines, major cargo
    airlines, regional airlines, corporate jet aircraft, and small GA
    aircraft in Alaska).

Expressed mathematically, this product and sum appear as follows:

$$B = \sum_{\text{ijk}}^{}T_{\text{ijk}}S_{\text{ik}}$$

where *B* is the LAAS benefit for straight-in approaches, *i* is the
year, *j* is the runway, *k* is the user group, $T_{\text{ijk}}$is the
total number of avoidable disruptions in year *i* at runway end *j* by
user group *k*, and $S_{\text{ik}}$is the monetary operational savings
obtained from each avoided disruption in year *i* by user group *k.*

It should be noted that this formula gives the total operational benefit
for the various user groups, but does not include the benefit to the
passengers. That benefit, based on the Passenger Time Savings (PTS) is
calculated similarly except that $S_{\text{ik}}$is replaced
with$P_{\text{ik}}$, the PTS from each avoided disruption in year *i* by
user group *k.* PTS benefits are calculated for all user groups except
cargo airlines.

### Derivation of the Number of Disruptions Avoidable with LAAS

To derive the number of disruptions that can be avoided with LAAS we
break the number down into its various components. This number can be
expressed as follows:

$$T_{\text{ijk}} = (N_{\text{ik}}U_{\text{jk}}(W^{B_{j}}A^{B}E_{\text{ik}^{B}} + W_{j^{\text{NB}}}(1 - A^{B}E_{\text{ik}^{B}}))A^{L}E^{L_{\text{ik}}})R$$

where;

$T_{\text{ijk}}$ is the total number of avoidable disruptions in year
*i*, on runway *j*, by user group *k,*

$N_{\text{ik}}$is the number of arrivals at this airport in year *i* by
user group *k,*

$U_{\text{jK}}$is the probability that runway *j* will be used for
arrivals of user group *k,*

$W^{B_{j}}$is the probability that the weather at this airport is
between the minima in ceiling and visibility for LAAS Cat X (where X is
either I, II/III) and the [B]{.underline}aseline navigation system on
runway *j,*

$W^{\text{NB}_{j}}$is the probability that the weather at this airport
is between the minima in ceiling and visibility for LAAS Cat X and the
[N]{.underline}ext [B]{.underline}est baseline navigation system on
runway *j,*

$A^{L}$ is the probability that [L]{.underline}AAS Cat X is available,

$A^{B}$ is the probability that the baseline system is available (next
best baseline system is assumed to be 100% available),

$E^{L_{\text{ik}}}$is the probability that an aircraft in group *k* will
be equipped and its pilots trained and certified on LAAS Cat X in year
*i,*

$E^{B_{\text{ik}}}$is the probability that an aircraft in group *k* will
be equipped and its pilots trained and certified on the baseline system
in year *i* (Next Best baseline system is assumed to be 100% equipped),
and

$R$ is a factor to account for the ripple, or downstream, effects of
each disruption.

As can be seen from this equation, the focus of the calculation is on
individual runways rather than the entire airport. This is due to the
runway-specific nature of some of the baseline technologies, and the
fact that approach minima are runway-specific. Therefore, the benefits
must be calculated at this level of detail and then aggregated to the
airport level.

The annual number of arrivals ($N_{\text{ik}}$) can be obtained in
various ways. One way is to use the Official Airline Guide (OAG) to
obtain the current demand for major passenger airlines and regional
airlines and apply growth factors from the FAA's Terminal Area Forecasts
to derive the demand in future years. A similar method can be used to
extrapolate from current to future years for major cargo airlines,
corporate aircraft, and low-end general aviation aircraft in Alaska.
Since some cargo carriers, and all air taxi and GA operators do not
publish schedules in the OAG, the baseline year can be obtained from
other sources (*e.g.*, from cargo airlines themselves, ETMS data, DOT
Transtat website[^16]).

Since the approach and landing capabilities are focused on individual
runways, it is necessary to determine the number of these avoided
disruptions that should be allocated to runway *j*. A logical way to
approach this problem is to determine the probability that each runway
is or will be used in instrument meteorological conditions
($U_{\text{jk}}$) and to multiply this factor by the number of avoided
disruptions for the entire airport. Although the Aviation System
Performance Metrics (ASPM) database contains information on runway
configuration use under various weather conditions, it is available for
only 46 airports and, moreover, the frequency of use of the individual
runways within each configuration is unknown. Therefore, runway usage
for all 120 airports must be derived based on the available data,
including wind direction, runway length and ILS placement. When
possible, these derived runway usage estimates were validated against
runway usage observations, (*e.g.*, some individual Airport Capacity
Enhancement Plans[^17]) and with airport operations representatives.

Recognizing that in most situations, airports favor one or two runways
in IMC and therefore these runways account for a disproportional number
of approaches, $U_{\text{jk}}$ also takes into account the likelihood
that an approaching aircraft will be routed to runway *j* as opposed to
another alternative. When the wind is less than 10 knots making it
possible for multiple runways to be used for approaches despite the wind
direction, the principal runway(s) are assigned 70% of the traffic and
the secondary runway(s) get 30%. These percentages are based on actual
observations of runway use and were documented in previous FAA benefits
studies.[^18] [^19] $U_{\text{jk}}$ is modified to take account of the
fact that not all aircraft for user group *k* may be capable of landing
on runway *j* since, for example, the runway may not be long enough to
accommodate a certain aircraft type.

To obtain the value for the probability of the weather being between two
minima ($W^{B_{j}}$ or $W^{\text{NB}_{j}}$), IBM accessed the ceiling
and visibility information for the 120 airports from the NCDC database
for the years 1998 to 2001[^20]. Since the ceiling data is available in
100 foot increments, it was necessary to use an interpolation to derive
the probability of weather for finer levels of gradation (*e.g.*, 50
foot increments). The ceiling and visibility minima which are used for
the baseline systems and LAAS are obtained from two sources: published
instrument approaches whenever available and alternatively, the output
from model runs conducted by the MITRE Corporation's Center for Advanced
Aviation System Development (CAASD) with its GPS Approach Minima
Estimator (GAME) model. It should be mentioned here that the possibility
exists that users may not be 100% equipped with the best baseline
alternative system at each airport, and so the derivation of $W_{j}$
must take this possibility into account by also considering the next
best alternative.

Since the benefit of avoided disruptions from lower minima can be
achieved only when LAAS is available and aircraft are equipped, it is
necessary to include factors for the availability ($A^{L}$) and
probability of being equipped ($E^{L_{\text{ik}}}$)in the equation. The
availability $A^{B}$and equipage $E^{B_{\text{ik}}}$of the best baseline
system are also taken into consideration. The pace of expected avionics
equipage was estimated through surveys and interviews conducted with
representatives from the user communities, and resulted in a range of
values used in the sensitivity analysis (See Appendix D for details of
how the pace of equipage was incorporated into the sensitivity
analysis).

Finally, a factor to account for the downstream effects of disruptions
is applied to obtain the total number of avoided disruptions (see
Important Considerations for Interpreting Results section for details of
the downstream effect factor).

### Derivation of Savings Obtained from Avoided Disruptions

To derive the savings that can be obtained from avoided disruptions in
year *i* by user group *k*, we break the number down into its
components. This number can be expressed as follows:

$$S_{\text{ik}} = C_{k}D_{i}$$

where;

$C_{k}$ is the average cost of a disruption in the year 2004 to user
group *k* and

$D_{i}$ is the discount factor in year *i* relative to the year 2004,

$$D_{i} = \left( \frac{1}{1 + r} \right)^{\left( i - \text{2004} \right)}$$

where *r* is the appropriate discount rate.

The average cost of a disruption to user group *k* ($C_{k}$) is
calculated by taking the sum of the costs of a delay, cancellation, and
diversion weighed by the frequency of their occurrence over a specified
past period[^21]. For major and regional passenger airlines, disruption
information was obtained from the Airline Service Quality Program (ASQP)
database for the years 1998 through 2003[^22]. For cargo carriers,
cancellations were set to zero based on airline representative input,
and the ASQP disruption rates for major passenger airlines were applied
for diversions and delays. For GA operators, cancellations were set to
zero, and ASQP disruption rates for regional passenger airlines were
applied for diversions and delays. An inflation factor, based on OMB
guidance[^23], was applied to derive the costs for 2004, the baseline
year for this analysis.

The factor$D_{i}$is multiplied by $C_{k}$to ensure that the future saved
cost of an avoided disruption is appropriately discounted, reflecting
the reduction in present value the longer the benefit is deferred. We
use a real discount rate of 7%, based on guidance from the OMB, as
referenced above.

### Example

To illustrate how the mathematical formula is applied to obtain the LAAS
benefit, we selected Washington Reagan National airport (DCA). DCA has 6
runways (01/19, 15/33, 04/22). All 6 runways are used for approaches and
only 01 is equipped with an ILS (Cat II). DCA runways 19, 04, 22, 15,
and 33 have a variety of non-precision (e.g., VOR/DME and GPS)
approaches with minimum decision heights ranging from 587 to 904 feet.
An opportunity exists to reduce the ceiling and visibility minima on
these runways with LAAS Cat I, if the users do not equip with WAAS.

To simplify this example, we will focus our attention on a single year
(*i* = 2020), single runway (*j* = DCA 15), and single user group (*k* =
corporate jet operators). Note that since DCA 15 is only 5204 feet long,
it is not appropriate for all users, such as major passenger airlines
and others who operate aircraft too large to land on this runway. Based
on the methodology described above, we obtain the parameters in the
Table 5. Note that the benefit for this year, runway end, and user group
is obtained by simply multiplying the first 8 parameters. To obtain the
Cat I benefit for the entire airport, we sum the discounted benefits for
20 years in our planning horizon, all runway ends, and all user groups.

Table 5. key parameter values for DCA 15 example

+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| $$    | $$W$$ | $$    | $$A^  | $     | $$C_  | $$D_  | $$R$$ | D     |
| N_{\t |       | U_{\t | {L}$$ | $E^{L | {k}$$ | {i}$$ |       | irect |
| ext{i | \% of | ext{j |       | _{\te |       |       | R     | Oper  |
| k}}$$ | time  | k}}$$ | Av    | xt{ik | Cost  | Dis   | ipple | ating |
|       | be    |       | ailab | }}}$$ | of    | count | E     | Cost  |
| \# of | tween | U     | ility |       | disru | f     | ffect | Be    |
| DCA   | LAAS  | tiliz | of    | LAAS  | ption | actor | F     | nefit |
| arr   | and   | ation | LAAS  | equ   | (Corp | for   | actor |       |
| ivals | Bas   | of    |       | ipage | orate | 2020  |       | (Corp |
| (Corp | eline | DCA   |       |       | jet   |       |       | orate |
| orate | m     | r     |       |       | Opera |       |       | jet   |
| jet   | inima | unway |       |       | tors) |       |       | Opera |
| Opera |       | 15    |       |       |       |       |       | tors) |
| tors) |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|       |       | (Corp |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|       |       | orate |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|       |       | jet   |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|       |       | Opera |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|       |       | tors) |       |       |       |       |       |       |
+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| 1,419 | .034  | .07   | .999  | 1.0   | \$    | .34   | 1.5   | \$    |
|       |       |       |       |       | 1,270 |       |       | 2,151 |
+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

### Results

Tables 6A and 6B, below show the total straight-in LAAS approach benefit
estimated for the 120 airports studied. Table 6A shows these benefits
for Cat I LAAS implementation, in terms of both reduced direct operating
costs and passenger time savings, as well as for the two scenarios of
user WAAS equipage. Table 6B shows these benefits for Cat II/III LAAS
implementation.

[Table 6a: Discounted 20 year LAAS Straight-in Benefits for Cat
I]{.smallcaps}

+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
|                       | **Direct Operating  | **Passenger Time      |
|                       | Cost**              | Savings**             |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$118,300,000       | \$122,300,000         |
|                       |                     |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS   |                     |                       |
| equipage)**           |                     |                       |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$3,900,000         | \$3,800,000           |
|                       |                     |                       |
| **(Assuming 100% WAAS |                     |                       |
| equipage)**           |                     |                       |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+

[Table 6b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Straight-in Benefits for Cat
II/III]{.smallcaps}

+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
|                       | **Direct Operating  | **Passenger Time      |
|                       | Cost**              | Savings**             |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$623,900,000       | \$599,700,000         |
|                       |                     |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS   |                     |                       |
| equipage)**           |                     |                       |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**     | \$623,900,000       | \$599,700,000         |
|                       |                     |                       |
| **(Assuming 100% WAAS |                     |                       |
| equipage)**           |                     |                       |
+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc76387635 .anchor}***Reduced Disruptions with LAAS
Takeoff Guidance***

A restricted ability to perform departure operations during low
visibility conditions, although rare, can be highly disruptive to
airport and airline operations. When low visibility conditions coincide
with an airport's departure bank, particularly early in the day, the
impact can be significant. In some cases it can take more than a full
day for an airline's operations to recover from the disruption to their
system that results from such an event[^24].

Current rules governing takeoff under low visibility conditions permit
operations in various RVR conditions depending on several factors,
including runway markings, lighting, RVR measurement equipment, surface
movement guidance and control plans, and aircrew training.[^25] Takeoff
operations in very low visibility conditions may be conducted with the
use of a takeoff guidance system, (*e.g.*, Cat III ILS localizer for
front-course guidance and a head up display (HUD)). It is expected that
LAAS Cat II/III, as part of a takeoff guidance system, will also provide
this level of guidance, potentially at far more runways than are
currently served by Cat III localizers. Thus, LAAS and HUD equipped
users benefit directly by continuing takeoff operations during these
conditions, and all airport users benefit indirectly from the reduced
time required for the airport to restore normal operations once these
low visibility conditions end (due to a smaller backlog of aircraft
waiting to depart).

Airports with a Cat III localizer will accrue benefit from this LAAS
capability only if demand is sufficiently high to warrant the use of
multiple departure runways under these conditions and if operational and
safety considerations permit departures from multiple runways under
these conditions. However, airports currently lacking Cat III localizers
may benefit significantly from this LAAS capability, and this analysis
is limited to such airports.

Within the 120 airports studied, 54 airports have a Cat III localizer.
Of the remaining 66 airports, existing infrastructure supports takeoff
operations at 500, 1000, and 1600 RVR at 23, 2, and 41 airports
respectively. Users equipped with a LAAS-based takeoff guidance system
may be able to benefit at these 66 airports.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of low visibility conditions during the
day for these 66 airports. Although these conditions are observed at all
times of day, the majority occur during the early morning, when the
impact on an airline's operation is greatest.

![](media/image7.wmf){width="5.44375in" height="3.267361111111111in"}

> [Figure 2. Time Distribution of Low Visibility Conditions among 66
> Candidate Airports.]{.smallcaps}

### Methodology

In order to investigate the delay savings that may be achieved by using
LAAS for takeoff guidance, we first determine the lowest takeoff minima
supported by each airport, including the timing and duration of these
conditions. We then combine that information with departure demand[^26].
Following that, we use an airport delay model to obtain an estimate of
the expected delays both with and without LAAS-guided takeoffs. In this
analysis, the impact of LAAS is modeled as the ability of the airport to
maintain IMC departure rates, for aircraft equipped with both LAAS and
HUD, while very low visibility conditions exist. The methodology
consists of the following steps:

1)  Obtain the required data:

    a.  Airports without a Cat III localizer

    b.  The lowest takeoff minima supported by each airport

    c.  The number of hours per year that each airport experiences
        visibility conditions below these minima

    d.  The IMC and VMC departure capacity of each airport[^27]

    e.  The total departure traffic at each airport for a typical
        day[^28]

2)  Run IBM's Single Airport Delay Model[^29] to calculate departure
    delay for two scenarios, accounting for the timing and duration of
    low visibility conditions:

    a.  Without LAAS: No departures during conditions with low
        visibility

    b.  With LAAS: Departures at IMC rates during low visibility
        conditions

3)  Calculate the average annual change in delay:

    a.  Take the difference between delays per flight in the two
        scenarios

    b.  Multiply this difference in delay per flight by the average
        daily traffic volume

    c.  Multiply this daily change in delay by the number of days with
        low visibility conditions

4)  Multiply by the percentages of LAAS and HUD avionics equipage and
    divide by 2 to get the portion attributable to LAAS

5)  Multiply by the downstream effect factor (see Important
    Considerations for Interpreting Results section, above)

6)  Multiply the minutes of delay by the cost[^30] of ground delay per
    minute for each user type

### Limitations

Following takeoff, LAAS may be able to provide precision departure
guidance, including procedural separation, on straight or curved
departure paths, potentially allowing for a higher rate of departure
operations under low visibility conditions than is possible with
localizer guidance and radar vectoring. RNAV departure procedures, using
existing avionics and ground systems, may also provide much of this
benefit. Thus, the impact of this LAAS capability is difficult to
evaluate.

### Results

Table 7, below shows the total LAAS takeoff guidance benefit estimated
for the 120 airports studied. The table shows these benefits for Cat
II/III LAAS implementation, in terms of both reduced direct operating
costs and passenger time savings, as well as for the two scenarios of
user WAAS equipage.

[Table 7: Discounted 20 year LAAS Takeoff Guidance Benefits for Cat
II/III]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$18,300,000          | \$17,500,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$18,300,000          | \$17,500,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

## Benefits from LAAS-based Complex Procedures

In addition to providing final approach guidance for straight-in
approaches, LAAS is also capable of supporting complex area navigation
(RNAV) procedures. However, a variety of other existing and planned
avionics and ground systems may also support such procedures. RNAV
procedures conducted without LAAS are reportedly capable of supporting
complex operations down to near-Cat I approach minima, and if linked to
an ILS final approach, down to the minima supported by the ILS. LAAS
offers the possibility of conducting complex procedures down to Cat I or
Cat II/III minima where no ILS is available, as well as the simplicity
of using a single system for terminal area navigation through final
approach and landing, potentially down to Cat III minima. Discussions
with major airline representatives have shown that simplification of
terminal area and landing procedures is a primary goal. Further, these
airlines view GPS-based RNAV/RNP as the navigation solution down to
near-Cat-I operations and LAAS-based RNAV/RNP as the desired transition
from GPS to GLS down to Cat-III operations. Based on this input, we
chose to evaluate LAAS-based complex approach benefits only in those
cases where no ILS is present and only for weather conditions worse than
those supported by baseline system approach minima.

LAAS may support complex operations either through use of the LAAS
position-velocity-time signal (PVT) as an input to an on-board
navigator, or through the direct broadcast of waypoints from the LAAS
Ground Facility (LGF). In the former, LAAS may provide improved actual
navigation performance (ANP) in the terminal area, and thus may support
more stringent required navigation performance (RNP) procedures than
other systems (*e.g.*, un-augmented GPS). This benefit may not be
limited to improved approach procedures, but may apply more generally to
airspace management, with very low RNP routes supported by LAAS, and
including highly precise vertical restrictions. Such routes have the
potential to resolve existing airspace conflicts, both within a single
airports operations (e.g., more precise separation of arrival and
departure streams at SEA), and among closely situated airports (e.g.,
runway use conflicts between ORD and MDW, SEA and BFI, or JFK, LGA, EWR,
and TEB). However, at this time, RNP levels have not been established
for these procedures, and thus it is not possible to discern which
requirements are beyond the capabilities of existing systems and which
will require LAAS. Further, it is anticipated that the RNP will vary
within the approach (and departure) environment, and thus the transition
point in the procedures from a GPS-based RNAV/RNP to a LAAS-based
RNAV/RNP is not clear. Until these RNP levels are established, the
extent of LAAS-enabled RNAV benefits will remain unclear.

The appeal of direct broadcast of waypoints, or data uplink, is twofold.
First, since the source of the procedure is local to the airport, uplink
eliminates concerns about version control of procedures among different
aircraft (that is, with an onboard database of procedures, and each
operator potentially updating procedures at a different pace, there is a
concern that two or more versions of a single procedure can be in use
simultaneously). Second, uplink of procedures may reduce the burden
placed on the onboard database for some aircraft. The costs of adding
and certifying increased storage capacity can be significant. Further,
as the number of procedures, including terminal area, en-route and
high-altitude routes, continues to increase, operators may be forced to
choose between the expense of database upgrades and the operational
complexity of isolating certain aircraft to particular regions. Since
the specific storage requirements for onboard versus uplinked procedures
are not yet defined (*i.e.*, even with uplink available, procedures may
need to be stored in an onboard database for other purposes), this
benefit of uplink is not clear.

In the absence of RNAV procedures, flight paths within the terminal area
during IMC are controlled by vectoring, a process that involves a high
level of air-to-ground communication and that can result in a broad
range of paths flown by individual aircraft. Reducing both the
communications workload and the variability in the time and distance
flown in the terminal area are of great interest to controllers, pilots
and airlines. RNAV/RNP procedures have the potential to significantly
reduce the communications component of this overall workload. Since
these procedures follow pre-set routes, the pilots can focus on flight
operations to follow the routes and the controller can focus on
surveillance. Further communications should only be necessary in the
event that the aircraft diverges from the assigned route, or the
controller determines that a deviation is necessary. One study of RNAV
terminal procedure development[^31] at Philadelphia found that
pilot-controller communications fell by over 60%, from 16 separate
communications required for vectoring to just 6 with RNAV routes. The
time and attention saved by eliminating these 10 communications can now
be focused on flying, and monitoring, the RNAV route. While LAAS may
contribute to the conduct of RNAV and RNP procedures, the ability of
other systems in the baseline to provide similar services eliminates
this as an incremental LAAS benefit.

Reductions in flight time variability could yield significant
benefits[^32] in terms of direct operating cost saved, improved customer
service and on-time performance, and through improved predictability of
arrival times for the airlines' gate operations. The value of
predictability was described well by David Knorr *et al*[^33];
"Predictability measures the variation in the ATM system as experienced
by the user. Commercial airlines may benefit as much from a reduction in
the variance (or an improvement in the consistency) of flight/taxi times
as they would from a reduction in average flight times. System
predictability allows for improved scheduling and more efficient bank
operations." Other aviation industry stakeholders and researchers have
also pointed out the high value of predictability to commercial
airlines.[^34] Additionally, it is one of the goals in the FAA's Flight
Plan 2004-2008 to "achieve greater conformity between expected and
actual flight times."[^35] Potential benefits from reduced flight time
variability are of particular importance at the nation's busiest
airports, due to the high volume of traffic handled, and to the related
importance for airlines to carefully time their operations. Earlier work
by IBM[^36] showed that flight time variability in the terminal area for
arrivals to ORD 9L is as much as 13 minutes, depending on what vectoring
path is assigned, and that a proposed RNP procedure for this runway
could reduce this variability nearly to zero. However, as was the case
for the benefits associated with communication workload, while LAAS may
contribute to the conduct of such RNP procedures, the ability of other
systems in the baseline to provide similar service eliminates this as an
incremental LAAS benefit.

### Estimated Complex Approach Benefit

As stated above, most terminal area complex operations can be
accomplished with existing or planned avionics and ground systems,
without the need for LAAS. Even complex procedures ending with a
precision approach may be performed by transitioning to an existing ILS
for the final approach and landing. In this section we explore the
benefits available to LAAS at those runways that do not have an ILS and
that did not receive any Cat II/III benefit in the Straight-In Approach
section of this work, and had no, or limited, Cat I benefit due to
relatively high estimated decision heights associated with LAAS. These
runways include candidates such as JNU 8 and 26, as well as DCA 19,
which for reasons of terrain or airspace restrictions cannot have an ILS
installation.

### Methodology

A key assumption in this methodology is the decision height achievable
by LAAS complex approaches at these runways. Since MITRE's GAME model
provides estimates of decision heights for straight-in approaches, we
can use its output strictly to inform us that these runways are obstacle
constrained to relatively high decision heights. In this analysis we
assume that there will be a learning curve for (or period of becoming
comfortable with) advanced LAAS capabilities such as these complex
procedures. Most newly introduced technologies do not achieve the full
potential of their capabilities until users become familiar with, and
comfortable with, those capabilities. Thus, we assume that during the
early years that a LAAS is used at each airport, the decision height for
a complex approach is no better than that associated with straight-in
approaches. Then, beginning in 2018, lacking any better information, we
simply assume that a complex terminal area path can be designed to
support the full Cat I decision height (200 feet), and that Cat II/III
minima are also achievable. Since it is not known whether a complex path
can be constructed at each of these runways to achieve these minima, we
recognize that this is an aggressive assumption. To address the
uncertainty of achieving such minima, we plan to estimate the benefits
using a sensitivity analysis that incorporates a measure of the
likelihood of reducing the decision height from that given by GAME for a
straight-in approach to the full Cat I or Cat II/III minima.

These assumed decision heights are then used as inputs to the method we
have described in the section titled "Reduced Disruptions for
Straight-in Precision Approaches". As in that section, the number of
reduced disruptions due to the improvement in approach minima are
estimated. Other benefits often associated with complex procedures, such
as reduced time or distance through the terminal airspace, appear to be
attributable to RNAV or RNP procedures, and the role of LAAS in
achieving these benefits is unclear.

### Limitations

For some runways included in this complex benefit estimate, it may be
possible to install an ILS. Installation of an ILS would change the
baseline against which LAAS is evaluated, and that runway's incremental
LAAS-based complex approach benefit would be eliminated. Efforts to
obtain data on ILS siting potential at NAS runways have not yet been
fruitful.

The complete solution to the question of LAAS complex approaches
involves significant complex technical issues beyond the scope of this
study. This method assumes that the complex approach segment has allowed
the aircraft to avoid controlling obstacles and intercept the final
approach path at a point closer to the runway than current procedures. A
preliminary evaluation of decision height improvements due to short
finals, conducted by CAASD using the GAME tool, and based on GLS TERPS,
indicated that few, if any, of the 120 airports would achieve any
decision height benefit from such short finals. The impact of possible
future changes in TERPS for LAAS approaches on achievable decision
height for short final is unknown.

### Results

Tables 8A and 8B, below show the total LAAS complex approach benefit
estimated for the 120 airports studied. Table 8A shows these benefits
for Cat I LAAS implementation, in terms of both reduced direct operating
costs and passenger time savings, as well as for the two scenarios of
user WAAS equipage. Table 8B shows these benefits for Cat II/III LAAS
implementation.

[Table 8a: Discounted 20 year LAAS Complex Approach Benefits for Cat
I]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$139,900,000         | \$127,000,000         |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$0                   | \$0                   |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

[Table 8b: Discounted 20 year LAAS Complex Approach Benefits for Cat
II/III]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$12,200,000          | \$11,500,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$12,200,000          | \$11,500,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

## Benefits Due to Elimination of ILS Critical Areas

Under certain weather conditions, the ILS signal must be protected by
ensuring that aircraft or other obstacles do not enter areas on the
airport surface where they may interfere with the ILS signal quality.
These areas are called ILS critical areas, and are shown on taxiway
diagrams, and are marked with appropriate signage on the airport
surface. These critical areas require that aircraft taxiing into
position for takeoff, or to cross the runway, must hold short at some
distance from the runway. The critical area is protected when instrument
approaches are being conducted with visibility less than or equal to 2
miles or ceilings are less than or equal to 800 feet.[^37] The figure
below illustrates an ILS critical area on Cincinnati's runway 18L.

![](media/image8.png){width="1.71875in" height="2.9791666666666665in"}

> [Figure 3. Example of an ILS Critical Area hold.]{.smallcaps}

Protection of ILS critical areas may cause delays to both the arriving
aircraft, and to aircraft taxiing on the airport surface. The impact
that LAAS may have on each of these delays is explored in the sections
below.

### Arrival Delay due to Protection of ILS Critical Areas

When arrival and departure operations are being conducted during the
same period on a single runway with an ILS critical area, the arriving
aircraft must be spaced further apart longitudinally in order to allow
for the time required for the departing aircraft to taxi through the
critical area and onto the active runway. This results in a reduced rate
of operations on that runway.

LAAS, when used for precision landing guidance in IMC, is expected to
eliminate the need for ILS critical areas on the airport surface. With
departing aircraft able to taxi closer to the runway, less time is
required for their final taxi into position for takeoff, with a
resulting reduction in required longitudinal spacing between sequential
arrivals as well as between arrivals and departures. Thus, the
elimination of ILS critical areas should allow a higher pace of
operations on these runways where both arrival and departure operations
are being conducted during reduced weather minimums.

The purpose of this section is to estimate the impact that ILS critical
areas have on airport capacity and average arrival delays. Since LAAS
can eliminate the need for ILS critical areas, increased arrival and
departure capacity may be achieved through decreased arrival-departure
and arrival-arrival spacing. Normally, a departing aircraft may begin
its departure after an arrival aircraft is safely off the runway, but at
a runway that is used for simultaneous departures and arrivals and that
has an ILS critical area, spacing between arriving aircraft must be
increased to allow a departing aircraft to taxi through the critical
area and depart before the arriving aircraft may land.

The following is the methodology that was used in this analysis.

### Methodology

1.  Identify ILS critical areas within the 120 studied airports.

2.  Identify which of the affected runways are used for both arrivals
    and departures during IMC.

3.  Calculate the estimated time in seconds to taxi through the critical
    area.[^38]

4.  Determine the minimum required aircraft time separation at the
    runway threshold, for two cases:

    a.  No critical area: Separation is dictated by wake vortex
        separation standards[^39].

    b.  ILS critical area: Separation between affected arriving aircraft
        is increased by the time needed for the departing aircraft to
        taxi through the critical area.

5.  Convert the minimum aircraft time separation into a runway capacity
    per hour for each case[^40].

6.  Use IBM's Single Airport Delay Model to estimate the flight delays
    associated with each of these cases for a typical[^41] traffic
    volume day.

7.  Take the difference in delays between these two cases to get the
    one-day delay savings for ILS critical area elimination.

8.  Multiply by the percent of LAAS avionics equipage

9.  Multiply by the downstream effect factor (see Important
    Considerations for Interpreting Results section, above)

10. Annualize the one-day delay savings and multiply by the cost[^42] of
    airborne delay for each user group in \$/min.

### Limitations

ILS Critical Areas were identified from airport taxiway diagrams. ILS
Critical Areas that are not identified on the taxiways diagrams (*e.g.*,
ILS critical area between SEA 16R and 16L, identified by Alaska
Airlines), and where runway operations include simultaneous IMC arrivals
and departures, are not included and may provide additional potential
benefits.

### Example: Cincinnati Airport (CVG)

Typical runway configurations at CVG include departures on runway 27,
and both departures and arrivals on either 18L/R or 36L/R, depending on
wind conditions. CVG has an ILS critical area hold on every runway.
Since runway 27 is dedicated to departures, we assume that most
departures will be sent to this runway, with only those departures above
and beyond the capacity of runway 27 being sent to the other runways.
The OAG schedule data show that the IMC departure capacity[^43] of
runway 27 is exceeded 11 of the 16 hours between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m. Thus,
in IMC the demand that exceeds runways 27's capacity, or approximately
160 departures per day must use either 18L/R or 36L/R, depending on wind
direction. It is these aircraft that are subject to hold at the ILS
critical areas, and which will thus require greater spacing between
arrivals in order to execute their departure.

Applying the steps of the methodology outlined above, we find that CVG's
ILS critical areas require departing aircraft to taxi an additional 15
seconds (runways 18R and 36L) to 25 seconds (runways 18L and 36R) to
perform a departure. This additional taxi time results in a ¾ mile
increased separation between arrivals on runway 18R/36L, and 1¼ mile
additional separation for 18L/36R. Next, we calculate the change in
arrival capacity represented by these increased arrival separations, and
use these capacities to estimate changes in airport delays. Finally, we
calculate a net annual direct operating cost savings and passenger time
savings due to reduced delays from ILS critical area elimination at
CVG[^44].

### Results

Tables 9A and 9B, below show the total LAAS ILS critical area arrival
delay benefit estimated for the 120 airports studied. Table 9A shows
these benefits for Cat I LAAS implementation, in terms of both reduced
direct operating costs and passenger time savings, as well as for the
two scenarios of user WAAS equipage. Table 9B shows these benefits for
Cat II/III LAAS implementation.

[Table 9a: Discounted 20 year LAAS ILS Critical Area Arrival Delay
Benefits for Cat I]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$17,300,000          | \$18,100,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$2,800,000           | \$3,000,000           |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

[Table 9b: Discounted 20 year LAAS ILS Critical Area Arrival Delay
Benefits for Cat II/III]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$2,400,000           | \$2,600,000           |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$2,400,000           | \$2,600,000           |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

### Taxi Time Delay due to Protection of ILS Critical Areas

The elimination of an ILS critical area may allow for a less impeded
flow of arrival and departure ground operations across runways that
currently have critical areas requiring a hold. The purpose of this
section is to estimate the impact that ILS critical areas have on
aircraft taxi operations.

Since multiple factors affect the pace of ground operations, it is
necessary to attempt to isolate the contribution to taxi time delay that
comes from protection of the ILS critical areas. Although the
requirement to protect the critical area is limited to ceiling and
visibility conditions below 800 feet or 2 miles, anecdotal evidence and
stakeholder interviews suggest that critical areas are sometimes
protected even in conditions outside of these limits. This practice
complicates the process of isolating the operational impact of ILS
critical area protection.

We proceed by collecting observed taxi times for each airport for
weather conditions above and below the ceiling and visibility conditions
of 800 feet or 2 miles. We then compare these observed times to the
unimpeded, or expected, taxi times. For conditions at or below the 800
feet or 2 miles limits, the difference between these is simply the IMC
taxi delay (observed time -- expected time). However, there are taxi
delays even in VMC, so we normalize our calculated IMC taxi delay by
removing this VMC delay. The remaining IMC taxi delay should reflect
conditions that are unique to the airport's IMC operational conditions.
Subtracting all of the VMC taxi delay in the normalization step may be
excessive, as there may be more volume related taxi delays in VMC than
IMC. However, taking this step suggests that our estimate is
conservative. One final step, the subtraction of the normalized IMC
delay averaged over all airports without an ILS critical area, should
help to eliminate those delays attributable to weather and congestion,
leaving delays due primarily to protection of ILS critical areas.

The following is the methodology that was employed in this analysis:

### Methodology

1.  Identify ILS critical areas within the 120 studied airports

2.  Identify the actual and unimpeded (expected) taxi-in and taxi-out
    time from the ASPM database

3.  Calculate a normalized IMC taxi-in and taxi-out delay per flight
    that isolates the delay due to protection of ILS critical areas:

    a.  Obtain the raw IMC taxi time delay by subtracting the IMC
        unimpeded taxi time from IMC observed taxi time

    b.  Obtain the raw VMC taxi time delay by subtracting the VMC
        unimpeded taxi time from VMC observed taxi time

    c.  Obtain the normalized IMC taxi time delay by subtracting the raw
        VMC delay from raw IMC delay -- this normalized IMC taxi delay
        represents delays in IMC, which may be due to both general
        operational slowdown in IMC and to protection of ILS critical
        areas

    d.  Further isolate the taxi delay specifically due to protection of
        critical areas by subtracting the average IMC taxi delay,
        normalized for VMC delay, observed at airports without critical
        areas

4.  Multiply this final normalized IMC taxi time delay, assumed to be
    due primarily to protection of ILS critical areas, by the cost of
    ground delay for each user group

5.  Adjust these delays for the percent of LAAS equipage

6.  Multiply the estimated per flight delay by total operations by user
    group

7.  Multiply by the downstream effect factor (see Important
    Considerations for Interpreting Results section, above)

Note that this methodology accounts for taxi delays associated with
aircraft, but does not include restrictions on other types of airport
surface traffic due to protection of ILS critical areas.

### Results

Tables 10A and 10B, below show the total LAAS benefits from the
reduction in taxi times made possible with the elimination of ILS
critical areas. Table 10A shows these benefits for Cat I LAAS
implementation, in terms of both reduced direct operating costs and
passenger time savings, as well as for the two scenarios of user WAAS
equipage. Table 10B shows these benefits for Cat II/III LAAS
implementation.

[Table 10a: Discounted 20 year LAAS ILS Critical Area Taxi-In and
Taxi-Out Delay Benefits for Cat I]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$46,600,000          | \$73,000,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$7,600,000           | \$11,800,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

[Table 10b: Discounted 20 year LAAS ILS Critical Area Taxi-In and
Taxi-Out Delay Benefits for Cat II/III]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$8,600,000           | \$13,800,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$8,600,000           | \$13,800,000          |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##  Benefits for Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches

Three of the operational capabilities identified in the LAAS Navigation
Capabilities Baseline are related to simultaneous independent parallel
approaches. This section summarizes the current state of knowledge about
the potential for using LAAS to support these types of approaches in
IMC.

### Operational Background

During VMC, the FAA allows aircraft to conduct simultaneous independent
approaches on parallel runways separated by as little as 700 feet. as
long as the pilots take over separation responsibility using "see and
avoid" principles.

When weather deteriorates, maintaining visual separation is no longer
possible and there are specific rules about the required separation
between runways under which aircraft can conduct simultaneous
independent parallel approaches. Currently, the minimum required
separation is 4300 feet in IMC.

This separation is required to ensure adequate time to prevent a
collision in the event that one of the aircraft on a parallel runway
approach (the blundering aircraft) turns in the direction of the second
aircraft (the evading aircraft). The separation distance is a function
of the surveillance error, navigation system error, flight technical
error, and the time required to detect the blunder, alert the evading
aircraft, and conduct an evasive maneuver.

With improved surveillance, pilot and controller training, and special
procedures, it is possible to conduct simultaneous independent parallel
approaches down to as little as 3000 feet runway centerline separations.
This entails the use of Precision Runway Monitors (PRM; a high update
radar and high resolution display) which can cost more than \$10M per
unit[^45]. Currently, if the runway centerlines are separated between
2500 and 3000 feet, the approaches must be dependent with the aircraft
positioned so as to have a minimum 1.5 nautical mile stagger on the
parallel runways. For runways separated by less than 2500 feet, neither
independent nor dependent approaches can be conducted in IMC due to the
potential hazardous effects of wake vortices, and consequently one of
the parallel runways is shut down for arrivals.

### Evidence in Support of Potential LAAS Benefits

Given that the separation distances are based in part on navigation
system errors, it seems logical to assume that it may be possible to
achieve reductions in the required separations distances (*i.e.*, below
4300 feet) with new navigation systems such as WAAS and LAAS.

In fact, a number of research efforts have been conducted on this issue
as well as a host of other technical issues related to achieving
increased airport capacity through a reduction in runway separations.
These research efforts have included:

-   Various studies by Sharon Houck *et al*. at Stanford University,
    showing the feasibility and potential benefits of WAAS or LAAS
    combined with tunnel-in-the-sky displays to reduce runway spacing
    while maintaining currently accepted safety levels. [^46] [^47]
    [^48]

-   NASA's Terminal Area Productivity Program which includes the
    Airborne Information for Lateral Spacing (AILS) and the Closely
    Spaced Parallel Approach (CSPA) Program. [^49] As part of this
    effort, NASA has been investigating ways to mitigate the effects of
    wake vortices on closely spaced parallel approaches.[^50]

-   Investigations of parallel runway technical issues and air traffic
    control procedures conducted by RTCA SC-186, Working Group 1. [^51]

-   Studies by Eurocontrol of the benefits of the Ground Based
    Augmentation System (GBAS), including studies specific to
    simultaneous independent operations.[^52] [^53] [^54]

-   MIT Lincoln Lab analyses and tests of PRM and associated procedures.
    [^55]

-   Analyses by MITRE/CAASD over the past 20 years supporting the FAA's
    research, feasibility studies, and certification of various
    simultaneous independent parallel approach procedures (including
    most recently, the RNP Parallel Approach Transition or RPAT) as well
    as investigating reductions in wake turbulence constraints. [^56]
    [^57] [^58] [^59] [^60]

It is clear from these studies that the largest contributor to the
required separation between parallel runways is surveillance error,
flight technical error, and the distance needed to detect and resolve
potential blunders. Although navigation system errors are not
insignificant, their contribution to the required runway separation is
minor (*i.e.*, less than 20% of the 4300' separation requirement)
compared to other errors and required distances.

Without new technologies to reduce the size of the surveillance errors
and flight technical errors as well as automated methods for detecting
and resolving blunders, LAAS alone is likely to have a negligible impact
on the reduction of lateral separations required for simultaneous
independent parallel approaches. An estimate of the impact of LAAS in
conjunction with other technologies will require a separate analysis
that is outside of the scope of this project.

Nevertheless, the existing studies do indicate that LAAS can be combined
with other technologies such as a tunnel-in-the-sky display or ADS-B and
CDTI to enable those technologies to achieve performances that they
would not be able to attain without LAAS. For example, Houck et al.[^61]
illustrated that a tunnel-in-the-sky display in the cockpit combined
with linear instrument approach corridors made possible with WAAS can
result in reductions in the required separation between parallel runways
from 4300 feet to 3100 feet. Clearly, with the greater horizontal and
vertical accuracy of LAAS when compared to WAAS, it should be possible
for LAAS to achieve and possibly surpass the reduction to 3100 feet
estimated to be attainable with WAAS.

Although not explicitly tied to LAAS, the FAA's Safe Flight 21 program
indicates that ADS-B could provide PRM-like capability at a wider range
of airports[^62]. Since the utility of ADS-B is linked to the accuracy
of its inputs, utilizing the best available positioning information
(*i.e.*, LAAS, where available) will maximize ADS-B's value. The FAA is
also exploring the use of RPAT (an ILS approach path on one track
combined with an RNP approach procedure and a visual side step maneuver
on the parallel track) for use with closely spaced parallel runways. The
possibility of using LAAS to increase the usability of RPAT procedures
appears to hold some promise, but is a research topic outside of the
scope of this benefits analysis.

In the following analysis, we estimated the potential improvement that
may be achieved when LAAS is combined with improved cockpit displays for
both the 0% and 100% WAAS user equipage scenarios. For the 100% WAAS
equipage case the incremental accuracy of LAAS over WAAS is not expected
to produce an appreciable difference in the required runway centerline
separation requirement for simultaneous independent parallel approaches,
and LAAS accrues benefits for the years prior to WAAS Cat I capability
in 2015.

There are 12 airports among the 120 candidate airports in the LAAS
benefits analysis that would be affected if the required separation for
simultaneous independent parallel approaches were reduced from 4300 feet
to 3100 feet. They include:

-   Tampa (TPA)

-   Ft. Lauderdale (FLL)

-   Detroit (DTW)

-   Salt Lake City (SLC)

-   Milwaukee (MKE)

-   Jackson (JAN)

-   Raleigh-Durham (RDU)

-   Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP)

-   Memphis (MEM)

-   Long Beach (LGB)

-   Portland (PDX)

-   New York -- Kennedy (JFK)

Minneapolis-St. Paul already has a PRM and thus is unlikely to benefit
from a combination of LAAS and other technologies and therefore it was
excluded from the analysis. Ft. Lauderdale, Salt Lake City, Memphis, and
John F. Kennedy, are listed in the Aviation Capacity Enhancement (ACE)
Plan[^63] as sites recommended for a PRM. It is possible that these
airports may be too far along the procurement path to have LAAS make a
difference. However, since delays in implementation may still occur, we
decided to include these airports in the analysis. The remaining
airports (Tampa, Detroit, General Mitchell, Jackson, Raleigh-Durham,
Long Beach, and Portland) are not in the list of sites recommended for a
PRM, and may be candidates for a capacity improvement with LAAS.

Using capacities from the FAA benchmark report[^64] and FAA's ASD
organization, we estimated the impact that bad weather has on these
airports and the magnitude of the potential arrival capacity gains that
may be achieved if the capacity from the parallel runways at these
airports is partly or wholly regained with LAAS and associated
technologies. Table 11 contains a list of the 11 airports that were part
of this analysis and their capacities. Note that the reduction in
capacity at these airports ranges from 14% at Detroit to a high of 67%
at Long Beach. A reduction of over 50% is probably caused by the closing
of one of the two parallel runways whereas a more limited reduction in
capacity (*e.g.*, 32% at MEM) is likely to indicate the use of dependent
parallel approaches at the airport when the weather deteriorates.
Capacities for JAN were unavailable, and values from RDU were
substituted based on similarities in the runway layouts and centerline
separations.

[Table 11. Capacities of Airports with Parallel Runways Between 3100 and
4300 ft. Separations Between Centerlines (Excluding MSP)]{.smallcaps}

  -------------- ---------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
  Airport ID     Airport Name     Optimum Hourly Reduced Hourly \% Arrival
                                  Arrival        Arrival        Capacity
                                  Capacity       Capacity       Reduction

  TPA            Tampa            71             50             30

  FLL            Ft. Lauderdale   65             27             58

  DTW            Detroit          84             72             14

  SLC            Salt Lake City   90             40             56

  MKE            General Mitchell 72             34             53

  JAN            Jackson          60             40             33

  RDU            Raleigh-Durham   60             40             33

  MEM            Memphis          88             60             32

  LGB            Long Beach       70             23             67

  PDX            Portland         60             38             37

  JFK            John F. Kennedy  74             48             35
  -------------- ---------------- -------------- -------------- --------------

### Methodology

In order to describe the methodology employed in this analysis, we will
step through an example involving JFK. To determine the impact that a
capacity reduction of the size shown in this table can have on
congestion and delays, we applied the IBM Single Airport Delay
Model[^65] to the demand and capacity data. The arrivals for a
representative traffic day[^66] were compared to the optimum and reduced
capacities at JFK. This analysis focused on Cat I operations, although
there is no restriction preventing Cat II/III simultaneous parallel
operations on runways separated by 3400 feet. Since reduced capacity
conditions occur approximately 7.5% of the time at JFK, or on average
about 1.75 hours per day, we applied a moving window of reduced delay to
the model, effectively creating different scenarios representing many
possible combinations of 1.75 hour windows during the course of a day.
For each of these scenarios, we calculated the average daily delay and
then averaged these average delays across the scenarios. This model
result (0.03 minutes per flight) was compared to the delays obtained
with JFK at optimum capacity (0.0 minutes per flight). The difference in
delays, 0.03 minutes per flight, represents the potential improvement
that can be achieved with LAAS.

Multiplying this value by the number of flights by user group yields the
delay minutes by user group. Then, multiplying by the cost of a minute
of delay, yields the total cost savings that might be achieved at JFK.
Finally, recognizing the fact that LAAS will need to be combined with
other technologies to achieve this benefit, we applied a factor of ½ to
the result. As with the other benefits estimated in this report, we also
applied a downstream effect factor for disruptions of 1.5. Over the 20
year benefits period, the total direct operating cost savings at JFK is
estimated to be \$225,000.

### Results

Table 12 shows the LAAS closely spaced parallel approach benefit for Cat
I LAAS implementation, in terms of both reduced direct operating costs
and passenger time savings, as well as for the two scenarios of user
WAAS equipage.

[Table 12: Discounted 20 year LAAS Closely Spaced Parallel Approach
Benefits for Cat I]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|                     | **Direct Operating    | **Passenger Time      |
|                     | Cost**                | Savings**             |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$9,400,000           | \$9,000,000           |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 0% WAAS |                       |                       |
| equipage)**         |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **LAAS Benefits**   | \$400,000             | \$0                   |
|                     |                       |                       |
| **(Assuming 100%    |                       |                       |
| WAAS equipage)**    |                       |                       |
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

### Summary

As indicated above, LAAS without advanced cockpit technologies or LAAS
in the presence of a 100% WAAS equipage scenario is unlikely to lead to
a significant reduction in runway separation distances required to
conduct simultaneous independent parallel approaches. However, evidence
from previous studies seems to support the conclusion that LAAS, when
combined with other advanced avionics, may be able to reduce these
distances and result in sizable quantifiable benefits in the 0% WAAS
equipage scenario. This comes about from the combination of improved
navigation system accuracy and reduction in the flight technical error.
LAAS may also enable more accurate position reporting when used in
concert with ADS-B, thus reducing the surveillance error. This may lead
to additional reductions in the required separation distances between
runway centerlines.

# [Safety Benefits]{.smallcaps}

Safety benefits were developed and reported in the February 2004
Preliminary Benefits document. These benefits are undergoing a
substantial revision and refinement to reflect comments received. The
next version of the safety benefits analysis is to be delivered August
31, 2004, and the safety benefits section will be updated at that time.

#  [Societal Benefits]{.smallcaps}

Societal benefits were developed and reported in the February 2004
Preliminary Benefits document. These benefits are undergoing revision
and refinement to reflect comments received. The next version of the
societal benefits analysis is to be delivered August 31, 2004, and the
societal benefits section will be updated at that time.

# [Appendices]{.smallcaps}

## Appendix A: Airports Included in this Study 

Airports were selected for this study through an objective process that
included the following selection criteria:

-   High traffic airports associated with likely LAAS users:

    -   Major passenger airlines (More than 20,000 operations over a
        three year period)

    -   Regional passenger airlines (Regional Airline Association -- Top
        50 airports)

    -   Cargo carriers

    -   Corporate operators (National Business Aviation Association --
        Top 10 airports)

-   LAAS Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) sites

-   FAA Operational Evolution Plan (OEP) airports

-   Current Cat II/III ILS airports

-   Qualifier Cat II/III ILS airports

Based on these criteria 120 airports throughout the NAS were selected
for this study, as shown in the following table and map.

  ----- ---------------------------- ----- ------------------------- ----- -----------------------
  ABQ   ALBUQUERQUE INTL SUNPORT,    FAI   FAIRBANKS INTL, ALASKA    OKC   WILL ROGERS WORLD,
        NEW MEXICO                                                         OKLAHOMA

  ACK   NANTUCKET MEMORIAL,          FAT   FRESNO YOSEMITE           OMA   EPPLEY AIRFIELD,
        MASSACHUSETTS                      INTERNATIONAL, CALIFORNIA       NEBRASKA

  AFW   FORT WORTH ALLIANCE, TEXAS   FLL   FORT LAUDERDALE/HOLLYWOOD ONT   ONTARIO INTL,
                                           INTL, FLORIDA                   CALIFORNIA

  ALB   ALBANY INTL, NEW YORK        FWA   FORT WAYNE INTERNATIONAL, ORD   CHICAGO O\'HARE INTL,
                                           INDIANA                         ILLINOIS

  ANC   TED STEVENS ANCHORAGE INTL,  FXE   FORT LAUDERDALE           ORF   NORFOLK INTL, VIRGINIA
        ALASKA                             EXECUTIVE, FLORIDA              

  ATL   THE WILLIAM B HARTSFIELD     GEG   SPOKANE INTL, WASHINGTON  PBI   PALM BEACH INTL,
        ATLANTA INTL, GEORGIA                                              FLORIDA

  AUS   AUSTIN-BERGSTROM INTL, TEXAS GRR   GERALD R. FORD            PDX   PORTLAND INTL, OREGON
                                           INTERNATIONAL, MICHIGAN         

  AVL   ASHEVILLE REGIONAL, NORTH    GSO   PIEDMONT TRIAD            PHL   PHILADELPHIA INTL,
        CAROLINA                           INTERNATIONAL, NORTH            PENNSYLVANIA
                                           CAROLINA                        

  BDL   BRADLEY INTL, CONNECTICUT    GSP   GREENVILLE-SPARTANBURG    PHX   PHOENIX SKY HARBOR
                                           INTL, SOUTH CAROLINA            INTL, ARIZONA

  BFI   BOEING FIELD/KING COUNTY     HNL   HONOLULU INTL, HAWAII     PIE   ST
        INTL, WASHINGTON                                                   PETERSBURG-CLEARWATER
                                                                           INTL, FLORIDA

  BGR   BANGOR INTL, MAINE           HOU   WILLIAM P HOBBY, TEXAS    PIT   PITTSBURGH
                                                                           INTERNATIONAL,
                                                                           PENNSYLVANIA

  BHM   BIRMINGHAM INTL, ALABAMA     HPN   WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW   PVD   THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN
                                           YORK                            STATE, RHODE ISLAND

  BNA   NASHVILLE INTL, TENNESSEE    HSV   HUNTSVILLE INTL-CARL T    RDU   RALEIGH-DURHAM INTL,
                                           JONES FIELD, ALABAMA            NORTH CAROLINA

  BOI   BOISE AIR TERMINAL/GOWEN     IAD   WASHINGTON DULLES         RFD   GREATER ROCKFORD,
        FLD, IDAHO                         INTERNATIONAL, DIST. OF         ILLINOIS
                                           COLUMBIA                        

  BOS   GENERAL EDWARD LAWRENCE      IAH   GEORGE BUSH               RIC   RICHMOND INTERNATIONAL,
        LOGAN INTL, MASSACHUSETTS          INTERCONTINENTAL                VIRGINIA
                                           ARPT/HOUSTON, TEXAS             

  BUF   BUFFALO NIAGARA INTL, NEW    ICT   WICHITA MID-CONTINENT,    RNO   RENO/TAHOE
        YORK                               KANSAS                          INTERNATIONAL, NEVADA

  BUR   BURBANK-GLENDALE-PASADENA,   ILN   AIRBORNE AIRPARK, OHIO    ROC   GREATER ROCHESTER
        CALIFORNIA                                                         INTERNATIONAL, NEW YORK

  BWI   BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON INTL,   IND   INDIANAPOLIS INTL,        RSW   SOUTHWEST FLORIDA INTL,
        MARYLAND                           INDIANA                         FLORIDA

  CAE   COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN, SOUTH JAN   JACKSON INTERNATIONAL,    SAN   SAN DIEGO
        CAROLINA                           MISSISSIPPI                     INTL-LINDBERGH FLD,
                                                                           CALIFORNIA

  CHA   LOVELL FIELD, TENNESSEE      JAX   JACKSONVILLE INTL,        SAT   SAN ANTONIO INTL, TEXAS
                                           FLORIDA                         

  CHS   CHARLESTON AFB/INTL, SOUTH   JFK   JOHN F KENNEDY INTL, NEW  SDF   LOUISVILLE
        CAROLINA                           YORK                            INTL-STANDIFORD FIELD,
                                                                           KENTUCKY

  CLE   CLEVELAND-HOPKINS INTL, OHIO JNU   JUNEAU INTL, ALASKA       SEA   SEATTLE-TACOMA INTL,
                                                                           WASHINGTON

  CLT   CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS INTL,      LAS   MC CARRAN INTL, NEVADA    SFB   ORLANDO SANFORD,
        NORTH CAROLINA                                                     FLORIDA

  CMH   PORT COLUMBUS INTL, OHIO     LAX   LOS ANGELES INTL,         SFO   SAN FRANCISCO
                                           CALIFORNIA                      INTERNATIONAL,
                                                                           CALIFORNIA

  COS   CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS     LCK   RICKENBACKER              SHV   SHREVEPORT REGIONAL,
        MUNI, COLORADO                     INTERNATIONAL, OHIO             LOUISIANA

  CVG   CINCINNATI/NORTHERN KENTUCKY LGA   LA GUARDIA, NEW YORK      SJC   NORMAN Y. MINETA SAN
        INTERNATIONAL, KENTUCKY                                            JOSE INTERNATIONAL,
                                                                           CALIFORNIA

  DAB   DAYTONA BEACH INTL, FLORIDA  LGB   LONG BEACH /DAUGHERTY     SLC   SALT LAKE CITY INTL,
                                           FIELD/, CALIFORNIA              UTAH

  DAL   DALLAS LOVE FIELD, TEXAS     LIT   ADAMS FIELD, ARKANSAS     SMF   SACRAMENTO
                                                                           INTERNATIONAL,
                                                                           CALIFORNIA

  DAY   JAMES M COX DAYTON INTL,     MCI   KANSAS CITY INTL,         SNA   JOHN WAYNE
        OHIO                               MISSOURI                        AIRPORT-ORANGE COUNTY,
                                                                           CALIFORNIA

  DCA   RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON     MCO   ORLANDO INTL, FLORIDA     STL   LAMBERT-ST LOUIS INTL,
        NATIONAL, DIST. OF COLUMBIA                                        MISSOURI

  DEN   DENVER INTL, COLORADO        MDT   HARRISBURG INTERNATIONAL, SWF   STEWART INT\'L, NEW
                                           PENNSYLVANIA                    YORK

  DFW   DALLAS/FORT WORTH            MDW   CHICAGO MIDWAY, ILLINOIS  SYR   SYRACUSE HANCOCK INTL,
        INTERNATIONAL, TEXAS                                               NEW YORK

  DLH   DULUTH INTL, MINNESOTA       MEM   MEMPHIS INTL, TENNESSEE   TEB   TETERBORO, NEW JERSEY

  DSM   DES MOINES INTL, IOWA        MHT   MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE TLH   TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL,
                                                                           FLORIDA

  DTW   DETROIT METROPOLITAN WAYNE   MIA   MIAMI INTL, FLORIDA       TPA   TAMPA INTL, FLORIDA
        COUNTY, MICHIGAN                                                   

  DVT   PHOENIX DEER VALLEY, ARIZONA MKE   GENERAL MITCHELL          TRI   TRI-CITIES RGNL TN/VA,
                                           INTERNATIONAL, WISCONSIN        TENNESSEE

  ELP   EL PASO INTL, TEXAS          MMU   MORRISTOWN MUNI, NEW      TUL   TULSA INTL, OKLAHOMA
                                           JERSEY                          

  EUG   MAHLON SWEET FIELD, OREGON   MSP   MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL       TUS   TUCSON INTL, ARIZONA
                                           INTL/WOLD-CHAMBERLAIN/,         
                                           MINNESOTA                       

  EWR   NEWARK INTL, NEW JERSEY      MSY   LOUIS ARMSTRONG NEW       TYS   MC GHEE TYSON,
                                           ORLEANS INTL, LOUISIANA         TENNESSEE

  EYW   KEY WEST INTL, FLORIDA       OAK   METROPOLITAN OAKLAND      VNY   VAN NUYS, CALIFORNIA
                                           INTL, CALIFORNIA                
  ----- ---------------------------- ----- ------------------------- ----- -----------------------

###  Map of Airports Included in this Study

# ![](media/image9.png){width="1.8958333333333333in" height="1.44375in"}

# 

# 

# 

# ![](media/image10.png){width="6.045138888888889in" height="4.411111111111111in"}

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

![](media/image11.png){width="1.8847222222222222in" height="1.41875in"}

## Appendix B: Order of Installation of LAAS Ground Facilities

The order in which LAAS ground facilities are installed is an important
factor in the estimation of LAAS benefits. For this study, airport
installations are assumed to take place at a pace of 24 per year, and in
order of greatest to least benefit; that is, the first installations
will be at airports with the highest benefit. A rank ordered list of
airports is constructed by calculating the full 20-year discounted
benefit, assuming LAAS is installed at all airports at IOC[^67] (June
2009 for Cat I; June 2013 for Cat II/III). A separate rank ordering is
obtained depending on whether user equipage of WAAS is assumed to be 0%
or 100%, since this assumption changes the benefits at many airports,
and thus, potentially changes the order among airports. The following
table shows the assumed date of installation at each of the 120 airports
studied.

  --------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  Airport   0% WAAS                       100% WAAS                     Airport   0% WAAS                         100% WAAS       

            Cat I          Cat II/III     Cat I          Cat II/III               Cat I           Cat II/III      Cat I           Cat II/III

  ABQ       Aug-2011       Aug-2017       Mar-2011       Aug-2017       JFK       Apr-2010        Dec-2013        Mar-2012        Dec-2013

  ACK       May-2010       Mar-2014       Feb-2010       Mar-2014       **JNU**   **Jun-2009**    **Nov-2017**    **Jun-2009**    **Nov-2017**

  AFW       .              May-2018       .              May-2018       LAS       Oct-2012        July-2018       Jan-2012        July-2018

  ALB       Sep-2010       Sep-2014       .              Sep-2014       LAX       .               Feb-2014        .               Feb-2014

  ANC       Jun-2010       Feb-2015       Nov-2009       Feb-2015       LCK       .               Jun-2018        .               Jun-2018

  ATL       Feb-2010       Jun-2013       Oct-2009       Jun-2013       LGA       Jan-2010        Jun-2013        .               Jun-2013

  AUS       .              Apr-2015       .              Apr-2015       LGB       July-2010       Feb-2016        Jan-2010        Feb-2016

  AVL       .              Sep-2016       .              Sep-2016       LIT       Feb-2012        Nov-2017        Feb-2011        Nov-2017

  BDL       Dec-2009       Mar-2015       .              Mar-2015       MCI       .               Dec-2014        .               Dec-2014

  BFI       .              Oct-2017       .              Oct-2017       MCO       Apr-2010        Oct-2014        Jan-2010        Oct-2014

  BGR       .              Jun-2017       .              Jun-2017       MDT       .               July-2017       .               July-2017

  BHM       Feb-2010       Jan-2017       .              Jan-2017       MDW       Nov-2012        Oct-2013        Sep-2011        Oct-2013

  BNA       Mar-2011       Dec-2016       .              Dec-2016       **MEM**   **July-2009**   **Aug-2014**    **July-2009**   **Aug-2014**

  BOI       Jan-2011       Nov-2015       .              Nov-2015       MHT       Oct-2010        Apr-2014        May-2010        Apr-2014

  BOS       .              Dec-2013       .              Dec-2013       MIA       Mar-2011        Jan-2017        Nov-2010        Jan-2017

  BUF       Mar-2012       Nov-2014       Dec-2011       Nov-2014       MKE       Jan-2010        Apr-2015        Dec-2009        Apr-2015

  BUR       Sep-2009       Mar-2017       .              Mar-2017       MMU       .               Apr-2018        .               Apr-2018

  BWI       .              Aug-2014       .              Aug-2014       MSP       .               July-2013       .               July-2013

  CAE       Oct-2011       Feb-2017       Aug-2011       Feb-2017       MSY       Oct-2010        Nov-2014        Mar-2010        Nov-2014

  CHA       May-2013       Nov-2017       Mar-2012       Nov-2017       OAK       Dec-2012        Oct-2017        Oct-2012        Oct-2017

  CHS       Feb-2011       Oct-2015       Jun-2010       Oct-2015       OKC       July-2010       May-2015        Feb-2010        May-2015

  CLE       Dec-2009       Jan-2015       Dec-2009       Jan-2015       OMA       .               May-2017        .               May-2017

  CLT       .              Sep-2013       .              Sep-2013       ONT       Jun-2010        Jan-2016        May-2010        Jan-2016

  CMH       .              May-2015       .              May-2015       **ORD**   **July-2009**   **July-2013**   **July-2009**   **July-2013**

  COS       Aug-2011       Jun-2014       Jun-2011       Jun-2014       ORF       Jan-2013        Dec-2014        July-2011       Dec-2014

  CVG       Oct-2009       Jan-2014       Sep-2009       Jan-2014       PBI       Dec-2011        Aug-2017        Aug-2011        Aug-2017

  DAB       Sep-2012       Dec-2017       July-2011      Dec-2017       PDX       Apr-2013        Aug-2015        Sep-2012        Aug-2015

  DAL       .              Jun-2015       .              Jun-2015       PHL       Feb-2012        Mar-2014        .               Mar-2014

  DAY       May-2011       Dec-2016       Oct-2010       Dec-2016       **PHX**   **Aug-2009**    **Nov-2016**    **Aug-2009**    **Nov-2016**

  DCA       Oct-2009       Jan-2015       Jan-2012       Jan-2015       PIE       Mar-2012        Dec-2017        Sep-2011        Dec-2017

  DEN       .              Aug-2013       .              Aug-2013       PIT       .               Apr-2014        .               Apr-2014

  DFW       Sep-2009       Aug-2013       Sep-2009       Aug-2013       PVD       Apr-2011        Sep-2015        Nov-2010        Sep-2015

  DLH       Jan-2013       Feb-2017       Dec-2011       Feb-2017       RDU       Feb-2013        Nov-2013        Nov-2011        Nov-2013

  DSM       May-2011       Nov-2016       Aug-2010       Nov-2016       RFD       Nov-2011        Apr-2018        Jun-2011        Apr-2018

  DTW       Nov-2009       Oct-2013       May-2011       Oct-2013       RIC       Aug-2010        Jun-2015        Mar-2010        Jun-2015

  DVT       Jun-2013       Sep-2018       .              Sep-2018       RNO       Dec-2011        Jan-2018        May-2011        Jan-2018

  ELP       .              Aug-2018       .              Aug-2018       ROC       Sep-2010        Sep-2016        Nov-2009        Sep-2016

  EUG       Oct-2011       Dec-2015       Jan-2011       Dec-2015       RSW       July-2011       Oct-2014        Aug-2010        Oct-2014

  EWR       .              Jan-2014       .              Jan-2014       SAN       Nov-2009        Mar-2016        .               Mar-2016

  EYW       Feb-2013       Aug-2018       Sep-2012       Aug-2018       SAT       .               Jun-2014        .               Jun-2014

  FAI       Oct-2012       Jan-2018       .              Jan-2018       SDF       .               Feb-2018        .               Feb-2018

  FAT       Dec-2012       May-2018       .              May-2018       **SEA**   **Aug-2009**    **May-2014**    **Aug-2009**    **May-2014**

  FLL       Jun-2011       Mar-2017       Dec-2010       Mar-2017       SFB       May-2013        Mar-2018        Feb-2012        Mar-2018

  FWA       Jan-2011       July-2017      .              July-2017      SFO       .               Mar-2015        .               Mar-2015

  FXE       Apr-2013       July-2018      Feb-2012       July-2018      SHV       Sep-2011        Sep-2017        Feb-2011        Sep-2017

  GEG       Dec-2010       Feb-2015       July-2010      Feb-2015       SJC       Mar-2010        Aug-2015        Oct-2009        Aug-2015

  GRR       Nov-2010       July-2015      Apr-2010       July-2015      SLC       Feb-2011        Dec-2015        Sep-2010        Dec-2015

  GSO       .              Feb-2014       .              Feb-2014       SMF       Aug-2010        July-2014       Apr-2010        July-2014

  GSP       .              Apr-2017       .              Apr-2017       SNA       Jan-2012        Oct-2016        Nov-2011        Oct-2016

  HNL       May-2010       Jun-2018       .              Jun-2018       STL       .               Sep-2014        .               Sep-2014

  HOU       Nov-2011       Nov-2013       Apr-2011       Nov-2013       SWF       Sep-2012        Mar-2018        Oct-2011        Mar-2018

  HPN       Nov-2012       July-2014      Jan-2011       July-2014      SYR       July-2011       May-2017        July-2010       May-2017

  HSV       .              Feb-2018       .              Feb-2018       TEB       Mar-2010        Oct-2016        Mar-2011        Oct-2016

  IAD       .              May-2014       .              May-2014       TLH       Jun-2011        Oct-2015        Apr-2011        Oct-2015

  **IAH**   **Jun-2009**   **Sep-2013**   **Jun-2009**   **Sep-2013**   TPA       Dec-2010        Jun-2017        Sep-2010        Jun-2017

  ICT       Apr-2011       July-2015      Dec-2010       July-2015      TRI       Mar-2013        Sep-2017        .               Sep-2017

  ILN       .              Jan-2016       .              Jan-2016       TUL       Jan-2012        Feb-2016        Oct-2010        Feb-2016

  IND       .              Nov-2015       .              Nov-2015       TUS       Mar-2013        Sep-2018        .               Sep-2018

  JAN       .              Nov-2017       .              Nov-2017       TYS       .               Mar-2016        .               Mar-2016

  JAX       Sep-2011       Sep-2015       Jun-2010       Sep-2015       VNY       Nov-2010        Apr-2017        Oct-2011        Apr-2017
  --------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

##  Appendix C: Derivation of Disruption Costs 

Disruptions occur when there is an interruption to a planned or optimum
flight schedule, and are categorized as delays, cancellations, and
diversions. These disruptions have costs for both aircraft operators
(Direct Operating Cost; DOC) and passengers (Passenger Time Savings;
PTS). Both DOC and PTS costs are assessed and reported by user type:
Major passenger airlines, Regional airlines, Cargo carriers, Corporate
jet operators, and General Aviation (GA).

### Direct Operating Costs

A weighted average delay cost was computed for direct operating cost of
Major, Regional, Cargo, Corporate, and other GA assuming two-thirds of
delays are ground delays and one-third occur in the air. FAA APO data
sources were used to obtain the recommended values.[^68] Corporate jet
DOC costs were provided by the FAA's Office of Investment Analysis and
Operations Research (ASD) including cost of crew, fuel and maintenance.

Cancellation costs were configured assuming a typical mid size aircraft
for Majors (*i.e.*, MD80) and for Regional carriers (*i.e.*, F100).
Based on inputs from airline representatives, it was assumed that Cargo
operators do not cancel flights, so no cost was needed for this user
group. It was also assumed that since general aviation flights are not
scheduled, corporate jet operators and other GA operators do not incur
cancellations.

Diversion costs were derived from the Issue Paper analyzing "Schedule
Disruptions" from the FAA's Office of Aviation Policy and Plans (APO).
The estimated average hourly costs of the aircraft for diverted flights
were obtained for Majors and Regional carriers. It was further assumed
that an average diversion time is approximately two hours, and the per
hour costs were multiplied for total diversion cost per flight. The
draft APO report used in this study (version 2) can be found at
http://apo.faa.gov/arcc/Research.htm for more information.

The average unit costs of disruptions used for DOC values are summarized
in Table C1.

[Table C1: Average DOC Disruption Costs (2004 dollars)]{.smallcaps}

  -------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
  Type of Disruption   Majors     Regional   Cargo      Corporate   General
                                                        (NBAA)      Aviation

  Delay (per minute)\* \$35.08    \$21.43    \$69.95    \$20.80     \$6.35

  Cancellation         \$6,820    \$2,132    \$0        \$0         \$0

  Diversion\*\*        \$8,047    \$4,412    \$9,845    \$2,496     \$2,202
  -------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ----------

\* Weighted Average direct operating cost

\*\*Assume Average duration of a diversion is 2 hours

### Passenger Time Savings

To monetize passenger benefits, the following PTS economic values were
used, listed below by user type.

[Table C2: Breakdown of PTS]{.smallcaps}[^69] [(dollars/hr)]{.smallcaps}

![](media/image12.png){width="6.066666666666666in"
height="2.790277777777778in"}

The Air Carrier's All Purposes recommended values in Table C2 were used
for Major and Regional users. Air Carrier Business category was used for
all corporate jet travelers. General Aviation All Purposes was applied
to all GA operations.

Aircraft capacity and utilization factors identified in Table C3 were
applied to Passenger Time Savings to obtain total PTS per flight.[^70]

[Table C3: Aircraft Capacity and Utilization Factors]{.smallcaps}

+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| #### Factor              | **Aircraft Seating  | **Passenger Load   |
|                          | Capacity**          | Factor**           |
| #### User Type           |                     |                    |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| Major Carrier            | 157                 | 72%                |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| Regional                 | 100                 | 62%                |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| Corporate                | 10                  | 50%                |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| General Aviation         | 6                   | 60%                |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+

### 

### Results Summary:

A weighted average cost of a disruption was calculated using the
observed occurrence of the three categories of disruption types.
Observed disruptions for major and regional airlines were analyzed based
on scheduled arrivals from Airline Service Quality Performance (ASQP)
database. The proportion of each disruption type was then used to
determine cargo, corporate, and GA disruptions.

Table C4 provides weighted average disruption DOC and PTS costs by user
type. Costs were computed using FAA-APO recommended values.

[Table C4: Average Disruption Costs by Carrier]{.smallcaps}

+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| #### User Type      | **Direct     | **Passenger | **Total Cost**   |
|                     | Operating    | Time        |                  |
|                     | Cost**       | Savings**   |                  |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| Major Carrier       | \$3,359      | \$2,765     | \$6,124          |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| Regional            | \$1,082      | \$2,262     | \$3,344          |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| Cargo               | \$2,246      | \$0         | \$2,246          |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| Corporate           | \$1,270      | \$232       | \$1,502          |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+
| General Aviation    | \$412        | \$138       | \$551            |
+---------------------+--------------+-------------+------------------+

### Data Sources:

1.  The DOT's Airline Service Quality Performance database was used for
    Scheduled Arrivals and Disruption data from January 1998 to
    July 2003. Outliers, such as the time period after September 11 and
    time periods associated with airline strikes were removed from the
    data.

2.  FAA APO data sources were used to obtain the recommended values.
    Updated Departmental Guidance to FAA Office of Aviation Policy and
    Plan, \"Economic Values for Evaluation of FAA Investment and
    Regulatory Programs\", FAA-APO-98-8:

    a.  Section 1- Treatment of Values of Passenger Time in Economic
        Analysis (U.S. Department of Transportation, FAA-APO-03-1, March
        2003)

    b.  Section 3- Aircraft Utilization and Capacity Factors (2002
        Passenger Air Carrier Capacity and Utilization Factors),Chapter
        Draft

    c.  Section 4- Majors and Regional direct operating cost (2002
        Aircraft Operating Costs), Chapter Draft

3.  Inflation Factors Source: Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic
    Analysis, GDP Price Indexes. OMB\'s GDP Price Index Guidelines were
    applied for projection to 2004 dollars.

## Appendix D: Sensitivity Analyses

There is considerable uncertainty surrounding the proper values of
several input parameters used in this benefits estimate. A sensitivity
analysis was conducted to determine the impact of this uncertainty on
the estimated benefits. This update to the LAAS efficiency benefits
includes sensitivity analysis on three parameters:

-   the cost of a disruption,

-   the rate at which LAAS avionics equipage occurs, and

-   the minimum avionics equipage level required for benefit accrual.

These three parameters were selected due to both the uncertainty of
their values, and their central importance in building the benefits
estimates. Based on research of historical precedents, published
estimates, and interviews with airline and other industry stakeholders,
there is a wide range of opinion regarding the correct value to assign
to the cost of a flight disruption, the likely pace at which users will
install new technology avionics, and the fraction of users that must be
equipped before concerns about mixed-equipage operations are overcome.
From this research, we have developed a range of expected values for
each of these parameters, including a central, or most likely value, as
well as upper and lower bounds. In each case, the central value was
first developed from research, and then validated with airline
representatives, with the upper and lower bounds also emerging from
these stakeholder discussions.

The risk modeling approach selected for this analysis varies the
parameter values between these upper and lower bounds in order to
explore the extent to which the uncertainty in the parameter values may
affect the benefits. This risk analysis was conducted using \@RISK, a
commercial software tool, which employs Monte Carlo simulation[^71] to
explore a large number of possible values of the uncertain parameters.

The sensitivity analysis was conducted in two steps. The first analysis
varied parameter values of both direct operating costs and passenger
time costs for the five user groups (major airlines, regional airlines,
cargo carriers, corporate jets, and general aviation). A triangular
distribution was applied, representing low, most likely and high values
of these costs. The tables below show the cost value ranges applied:

[Table D1: Direct Operating Costs]{.smallcaps} Ranges

+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| #### User Type | **Low         | **Best or Most  | **High           |
|                | Estimate**    | Likely          | Estimate**       |
|                |               | Estimate**      |                  |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| Major Carrier  | \$2,330       | \$3,359         | \$5,278          |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| Regional       | \$949         | \$1,082         | \$1,340          |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| Cargo          | \$1,987       | \$2,246         | \$2,570          |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| Corporate      | \$797         | \$1,270         | \$1,872          |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+
| General        | \$352         | \$412           | \$491            |
| Aviation       |               |                 |                  |
+----------------+---------------+-----------------+------------------+

[Table D2: Ground and Airborne Delay Unit Costs]{.smallcaps} Ranges

+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| #### User Type  | **Low          | **Best         | **High          |
|                 | Estimate**     | Estimate**     | Estimate**      |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
|                 | Ground /       | Ground /       | Ground /        |
|                 | Airborne       | Airborne       | Airborne        |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| Major Carrier   | \$27.63 /      | \$30.70 /      | \$33.77 /       |
|                 | \$39.47        | \$43.85        | \$48.24         |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| Regional        | \$16.88 /      | \$18.75 /      | \$20.63 /       |
|                 | \$24.11        | \$26.79        | \$29.47         |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| Cargo           | \$55.09 /      | \$61.21 /      | \$67.33 /       |
|                 | \$78.70        | \$87.44        | \$96.18         |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| Corporate       | \$14.04 /      | \$15.60 /      | \$17.16 /       |
|                 | \$28.08        | \$31.20        | \$34.32         |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
| General         | \$5.00 /       | \$5.55 /       | \$6.11 / \$8.73 |
| Aviation        | \$7.15         | \$7.94         |                 |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+

[Table D3: Passenger Time Savings Costs]{.smallcaps} Ranges

+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| #### User Type | **Low          | **Best          | **High          |
|                | Estimate**     | Estimate**      | Estimate**      |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Major Carrier  | \$2,121        | \$2,765         | \$3,722         |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Regional       | \$1,062        | \$2,262         | \$4,368         |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Cargo          | \$0            | \$0             | \$0             |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Corporate      | \$46           | \$232           | \$613           |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| General        | \$67           | \$138           | \$256           |
| Aviation       |                |                 |                 |
+----------------+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+

In the second analysis, another distribution was applied based on low,
medium, and high values of the time to equip and the minimum required
equipage. These values are consistent with recommendations received
through interviews with airline and air traffic control representatives:

-   5 years to equip with 0% critical mass,

-   6 years for fleet to equip with 80% critical mass and

-   8 years equipage rate with 100% critical mass, respectively.

Conducting the sensitivity analysis using these bounds produces
risk-adjusted benefits for both direct operating cost and passenger time
savings, for the two WAAS user equipage scenarios. Figures D1 through D4
show the range of estimated LAAS benefits, highlighting the 5^th^ and
95^th^ percentiles. Figures D1 and D2 show these results for direct
operating costs and the 0% and 100% WAAS user equipage scenarios,
respectively. Figures D3 and D4 show these results for passenger time
savings and the 0% and 100% WAAS user equipage scenarios, respectively.

![](media/image13.wmf){width="4.15625in" height="2.2916666666666665in"}

Figure D1: LAAS Direct Operating Cost Benefits (assuming 0% WAAS
equipage)

![](media/image14.wmf){width="4.15625in" height="2.2916666666666665in"}

Figure D2: LAAS Direct Operating Cost Benefits (assuming 100% WAAS
equipage)

![](media/image15.wmf){width="4.15625in" height="2.2916666666666665in"}

Figure D3: LAAS Passenger Time Savings (assuming 0% WAAS equipage)

![](media/image16.wmf){width="4.15625in" height="2.2916666666666665in"}

Figure D4: LAAS Passenger Time Savings (assuming 100% WAAS equipage)

Another output of the sensitivity analysis is an estimate of the
relative influence that the uncertain parameters have on the benefits.
In this case, the disruption cost parameter was shown to have about 50%
more influence than the time to equip and critical mass parameters for
the case of 0% WAAS equipage by users, and roughly equal influence with
the time to equip and critical mass parameters for the case of 100% WAAS
equipage by users.

## Appendix E: Derivation of the Single Airport Delay Model

The Single Airport Delay Model is a deterministic model that can be used
to estimate delays at a single airport when demand exceeds capacity.
Since the model is deterministic, it does not take into account all of
the delays that may occur due to the randomness of operations at a
capacity constrained resource. Nevertheless, it offers a very reasonable
approximation to those delays.

### Basic Methodology and Illustrative Example

The model is based on a methodology described on pp. 339-343 of Robert
Horonjeff's and Francis McKelvey's "Planning and Design of Airports"
(4^th^ edition, 1994). The idea behind the model is fairly
straightforward. Any demand that cannot be satisfied by the available
capacity during a particular period rolls over into the next period and
contributes to delay. If the capacity during that period is sufficient
to handle the rollover demand plus the new demand arriving in that
period, there is no additional delay. However, if the demand exceeds the
capacity, a rollover into the next period occurs once again and the
delay accumulates. The spreadsheet model calculates the average delay
and a number of other metrics that summarize the performance of the
airport.

To understand how the model calculates delay, we use a simple example.
Figure E1 illustrates the overall problem. A given airport has
insufficient capacity to handle the demand. This demand can be in the
form of arrivals, departures, or both, and the capacity can be for a
single runway or multiple runways at the airport. The unit of time is a
quarter hour, but can just as well be any other value. Note in this
example that in the second quarter hour, the demand of 5 flights exceeds
the capacity of 4 flights per 15 minute period.

![](media/image17.wmf)

Figure E1. Illustrative Example of Demand and Capacity versus Time at an
Airport

Figure E2 shows another way of representing this same data. In this
graph, the demand and capacity are depicted as cumulative functions over
the specified time period. Note that the cumulative capacity curve
begins at the point in time when the demand rate starts to exceed the
service rate or capacity (end of the first time period). For any point
in time after that on the horizontal axis (until the two curves
intersect once again), the vertical distance between the two curves
represents the total queue at that point in time. Similarly, for any
flight on the vertical axis, the horizontal distance between the two
curves corresponds to the total delay experienced by that flight. The
area between the two curves is the total delay for all the flights in
this five quarter hour period.

![](media/image18.wmf)

[Figure E2. Cumulative Demand and Capacity Versus Time]{.smallcaps}

In order to simplify Figure E2, we compute the difference between the
cumulative demand and cumulative capacity and plot the result as a
function of time over the period of interest when the demand exceeds the
capacity. This effectively transforms Figure E2 into another graph (see
Figure E3) with the y-value representing the total queue at any point in
time. Note that in addition to obtaining the queue length, we can also
derive a number of other performance measurements from this graph. For
example, the maximum queue length can be easily seen to be 3.

![](media/image19.wmf)

[Figure E3. Difference Between Cumulative Demand and Cumulative Capacity
as a Function of Time]{.smallcaps}

Service time is the reciprocal of the capacity. For this particular
example, the capacity is 16 aircraft/60 minutes, which gives a service
time of 3.75 minutes per aircraft. Therefore the value for the longest
delayed aircraft can be obtained by multiplying the maximum queue length
by 3.75 minutes, thus obtaining 3 x 3.75 minutes = 11.25 minutes. The
delay for all aircraft during any 15 minute period can be derived by
calculating the area of the curve for that 15 minute period. This
amounts to calculating the area of one of the triangles or trapezoids
labeled A, B, C, or D. For example, the delay during the first 15 minute
period is simply the area of triangle A - ½ x base x height or ½ x 15
minutes x 1 = 7.5 minutes. Note that the calculation of the area of D is
a little more complex since the function does not intersect the x-axis
at a convenient break point (multiple of the quarter hour time
interval). Therefore, it is necessary to determine the exact point of
intersection before the calculation can be performed.

Once the areas under the curve are determined for each quarter hour
period, the total delay for all aircraft during the entire period can be
obtained by summing the areas of all these triangles and trapezoids. In
this example, this area turns out to be 85 minutes. The average delay
per aircraft is then simply the total delay divided by the number of
aircraft or 85 minutes/16 aircraft = 5.3 minutes/aircraft.

### Inputs and Outputs in the Model 

### Model Input: Estimated Total Traffic 

The total traffic demand at an airport, a key input to the Single
Airport Delay Model, is estimated for each fifteen minute time period
for a typical day by using the scheduled volume and factoring in an
estimate of unscheduled traffic. We build up total traffic from three
elements; 1) scheduled, 2) unscheduled IFR, and 3) VFR traffic. To
address these three elements, three data sources from FAA-APO were used
for this analysis: Flight Schedule Data System (FSDS), Enhanced Traffic
Management System Counts (ETMSC), and OPSNET.

Scheduled volume was obtained from the FSDS database, using April 30,
2003 as a representative traffic volume day. This date was selected
because the arrival count for that date had the median volume,
nationwide, of the 2003 calendar year. Scheduled traffic is allotted to
15 minute periods throughout the day. To add unscheduled volume, ETMSC
data, which include both scheduled and unscheduled IFR traffic, was
obtained. We selected data for four Wednesdays within the same month,
April 9, 16, 23 and 30, 2003 to obtain a representative sampling of the
variability of this unscheduled traffic. An average ETMSC count of
arrivals and departures for these four days was calculated and the
number of flights above and beyond the scheduled traffic was then added
to the original FSDS-based daily volume. These flights were added
randomly to 15 minute periods over the 24 hours of the day. VFR traffic
was added through a similar process. Flight counts were obtained from
OPSNET, which includes both IFR and VFR flights. OPSNET flight counts
above and beyond the average ETMSC traffic represent an estimate of VFR
traffic, and were added to the scheduled and unscheduled traffic. Since
these VFR flights typically occur during daylight hours, this volume was
added randomly between 6am and 10pm to complete our total traffic
estimate.

#### Example: 

To illustrate the method of building the total traffic, the following
chart shows simulated numbers of arrivals reported by each database, for
an imaginary example airport, ABC, on April 30th, 2003.

  ----------- ---------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  Airport     FSDS Arrivals    ETMSC Arrivals       OPSNET Arrivals

  ABC         200              224                  240
  ----------- ---------------- -------------------- ---------------------

The 200 scheduled FSDS arrivals are allotted to their proper
quarter-hour periods. ETMSC reports 24 additional arrivals beyond those
in FSDS. We use a random number generator to assign these 24 flights to
quarter-hour time slots, adding these to the FSDS arrivals already in
those quarter-hours. NOTE: The random number generator allows for
replacement[^72], so any quarter-hour throughout the day can have any
number of these 24 flights added to it.

The random assignment process is repeated for the additional 16 OPSNET
arrivals above and beyond those recorded in the ETMSC database. These
sixteen flights will be added at random to the new volume calculated
from the FSDS + ETMSC data. The end result is an estimate of the total
traffic encountered at an airport, and it is used as an input to IBM's
Single Airport Delay Model to simulate the actual flights that arrive
and depart at each airport on that day.

The chart below illustrates how these arrivals might be assigned to
quarter-hour periods to build a total number of arrivals for each
period. Only part of a complete 24 hour day is shown for this example.

![](media/image20.wmf){width="3.520138888888889in"
height="4.999305555555556in"}

## 

Continuing the example from the previous sections, Table E1 shows the
values derived by the model for this illustrative example, including all
of the critical system performance parameters.

[Table E1. Single Airport Delay Model Inputs and Results for
Illustrative Example]{.smallcaps}

  ----------------- ---------- ------------ ------- -------------- ------------------ --------------- ----------
  **Quarter Hour**  **Demand   **Capacity   **D -   **\# of        **Delays/Quarter   **Dem\>Cap?**   **A/C in
                    (D)**      (C)**        C**     Aircraft in    Hour**                             Queue?**
                                                    Queue**                                           

  0:15              1          4            -3      0                                 0               0

  0:30              5          4            1       1              7.5                1               1

  0:45              6          4            2       3              30.0               1               1

  1:00              3          4            -1      2              37.5               0               1

  1:15              1          4            -3      0              10.0               0               0

                    16                                                                                

                                                                                                      

  Total delay =                             85.0    minutes        or                 1.4             hours

  Average delay per                         5.3     min/aircraft                                       
  aircraft =                                                                                          

  Largest number of                         3       aircraft                                           
  aircraft delayed                                                                                    
  =                                                                                                   

  Delay time for                            11.3    minutes                                            
  longest-delayed                                                                                     
  aircraft =                                                                                          

  \# of quarter                             2                      or                 40%             of the
  hours when                                                                                          time
  demand\>cap =                                                                                       

  \# of quarter                             3                      or                 60%             of the
  hours when ac in                                                                                    time
  queue =                                                                                             
  ----------------- ---------- ------------ ------- -------------- ------------------ --------------- ----------

The inputs to the model are the demand and the capacity. Demand at each
airport was estimated as described above, using the scheduled volume and
factoring in an estimate of unscheduled traffic. Airport capacity data
was provided by FAA ASD-430.

The model simply calculates the difference between the demand and
capacity during each period. The "#of Aircraft in Queue" column contains
the queue lengths (shown as y-axis values (Aircraft In Queue) in Figure
E3). They are obtained by calculating the difference between the overall
demand (flights left over from the previous period plus those arriving
in this period) and the capacity. Negative values are set equal to zero
since we cannot have a negative queue length.

The "Delays/Quarter Hour" are obtained by calculating the areas of the
triangles and trapezoids as described earlier (in reference to Figure
E3). The last two columns are simply set to 1 when the fourth and fifth
columns, respectively, are greater than 0.

The highlighted metrics at the bottom of the table summarize the results
of the computations. The methods for deriving the first four values were
described previously. The last two metrics are obtained by taking the
sum of the last two columns and dividing by the total number of quarter
hour periods to obtain the "# of quarter hours when demand exceeds
capacity" and the "# of quarter hours when aircraft are in queue",
respectively.

### Summary

In summary, it is important to note that the Single Airport Delay Model
is extremely simple to use and can be easily adapted to determine delays
associated with any demand and capacity imbalance. It is not restricted
to aircraft and airports, but in fact can be used for a wide variety of
applications. In particular, it has already proven to be useful in
determining delays that may occur from the introduction of new security
screening equipment and procedures at airline cargo facilities.

## Appendix F: Navigation Capabilities Baseline

LAAS benefits are estimated relative to a baseline of existing and
planned systems. This baseline was defined in the Navigation
Capabilities Baseline delivered November 2003. The following three
tables, excerpted from the earlier deliverable, contain the key elements
of the baseline:

1.  NAS Baseline -- the existing and planned ground and space-based
    infrastructure

2.  System Capabilities -- those capabilities associated with existing
    and planned systems

3.  User Baseline -- estimates of avionics equipage levels for the
    relevant systems

### Table F1: NAS Baseline

![](media/image21.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="5.4527777777777775in"}

![](media/image22.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="9.705555555555556in"}

![](media/image23.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="9.224305555555556in"}

![](media/image24.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="9.970138888888888in"}

![](media/image25.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="9.970138888888888in"}

![](media/image26.wmf){width="6.811805555555556in"
height="10.097222222222221in"}

![](media/image27.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="9.753472222222221in"}

![](media/image28.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="10.009722222222223in"}

![](media/image29.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="10.025694444444444in"}

![](media/image30.wmf){width="6.898611111111111in"
height="4.307638888888889in"}

**Table F2: System Capabilities**

![](media/image31.wmf){width="6.875in" height="9.411111111111111in"}

**Table F3: User Baseline**

![](media/image32.wmf){width="6.89375in" height="8.761111111111111in"}

![](media/image33.wmf){width="6.89375in" height="9.025in"}

## Appendix G: Potential LAAS Sites Outside of the 120 Airports

The following airports, listed in alphabetical order, have been
identified by airline stakeholders as potential LAAS candidate airports
outside the IBM 120 Airports.

  ------------ -------------------------------- ------------------ -----------
  **Airport    **Location**                     **2003 Scheduled   
  Code**                                        Arrivals**         

  ASE          Aspen, CO                        4,162              []{.mark}

  EAT          Wenatchee, WA                    2,334              

  EGE          Eagle County, CO                 2,257              []{.mark}

  GUC          Gunnison County, CO              1,387              []{.mark}

  ISP          Long Island, NY                  16,243             []{.mark}

  JAC          Jackson Hole, WY                 4,979              []{.mark}

  PUW          Pullman, WA                      1,744              []{.mark}

  SIT          Sitka, AL                        1,647              []{.mark}

  SUN          Sun Valley, ID                   4,333              []{.mark}

  YAK          Yakutat, AL                      1,196              []{.mark}
  ------------ -------------------------------- ------------------ -----------

### Limitations

Lack of operational data precludes analyzing these airports at the same
level of detail as was performed for the IBM 120 Airports.

Analysis of airports outside of the original list of 120 is currently
out of scope for this study.

## Appendix H: Aviation Facilities within 23nm of the 120 Airports

The LAAS Concept of Operations (CONOPS), dated August 5, 2002, states
the LAAS service coverage volume extends out to 23nm[^73] radially from
the LAAS Ground Facility VDB \[Very High Frequency (VHF) Data Broadcast
(VDB)\].

IBM identified the aviation facilities (*e.g.*, other airports, seaplane
bases, gliderports, and heliports) within 23nm of each of the IBM 120
Airports from entries in the NFDC[^74] database. Table H1 lists the
results of this investigation, which identified: 1) 6,453 total aviation
facilities within 23nm of all 120 airports, and 2) 428 total aviation
facilities within 23nm of the 6 LRIP Airports.

This table shows the scope of potential beneficiaries of the LAAS signal
if LAAS were installed at each of the 120 airports. No claim of benefits
is made for this potential capability, as the evaluation and
certification of LAAS service to proximate facilities has yet to be
determined by the FAA.

### Table H1: Number of aviation facilities within 23nm of each of the 120 Airports.

The LAAS LRIP sites are shown in bold.

  ----------- ------------ ----------- ------------ ----------- ------------ ----------- -------- ------------ ----------- -------- ------------ --------- ----------- ------------
  **Airport   **\# of      **Airport   **\# of      **Airport   **\# of      **Airport            **\# of      **Airport            **\# of                **Airport   **\# of
  Code**      Proximate    Code**      Proximate    Code**      Proximate    Code**               Proximate    Code**               Proximate              Code**      Proximate
              Airports**               Airports**               Airports**                        Airports**                        Airports**                         Airports**

  ABQ         13           CHS         10           FAI         13           JFK         86                    OKC         57                    SDF                   31

  ACK         4            CLE         62           FAT         26           **JNU**     **6**                 OMA         35                    **SEA**               **85**

  AFW         124          CLT         31           FLL         52           LAS         22                    ONT         53                    SFB                   56

  ALB         42           CMH         71           FWA         57           LAX         152                   **ORD**     **93**                SFO                   26

  ANC         24           COS         23           FXE         41           LCK         50                    ORF         34                    SHV                   28

  ATL         75           CVG         39           GEG         32           LGA         104                   PBI         38                    SJC                   18

  AUS         31           DAB         23           GRR         34           LGB         161                   PDX         99                    SLC                   28

  AVL         11           DAL         116          GSO         30           LIT         35                    PHL         148                   SMF                   37

  BDL         75           DAY         57           GSP         23           MCI         68                    **PHX**     **78**                SNA                   81

  BFI         75           DCA         71           HNL         13           MCO         64                    PIE         35                    STL                   66

  BGR         12           DEN         73           HOU         160          MDT         77                    PIT         68                    SWF                   45

  BHM         23           DFW         139          HPN         68           MDW         77                    PVD         49                    SYR                   34

  BNA         29           DLH         13           HSV         21           **MEM**     **38**                RDU         21                    TEB                   114

  BOI         18           DSM         25           IAD         73           MHT         65                    RFD         83                    TLH                   11

  BOS         75           DTW         46           **IAH**     **128**      MIA         57                    RIC         35                    TPA                   42

  BUF         44           DVT         73           ICT         55           MKE         43                    RNO         22                    TRI                   17

  BUR         138          ELP         9            ILN         42           MMU         149                   ROC         40                    TUL                   50

  BWI         70           EUG         27           IND         94           MSP         72                    RSW         39                    TUS                   17

  CAE         21           EWR         141          JAN         25           MSY         40                    SAN         20                    TYS                   34

  CHA         18           EYW         6            JAX         28           OAK         32                    SAT         59                    VNY                   137
  ----------- ------------ ----------- ------------ ----------- ------------ ----------- -------- ------------ ----------- -------- ------------ --------- ----------- ------------

There is a wide variety of facilities included in the list above. To
give a sample of these facilities, Table H2 details the 84 aviation
facilities within 23nm of SEA.

### Table H2: Aviation facilities within 23nm of SEA

  ----------- ------------------------------------- -------------------- -----------
  **Locid**   **Airport Name**                      **City**             **State**

  02WA        CAWLEYS SOUTH PRAIRIE                 SOUTH PRAIRIE        WA

  08WA        MANCHESTER LABORATORY                 MANCHESTER           WA

  0S8         PORT ORCHARD                          PORT ORCHARD         WA

  0W0         SEATTLE SEAPLANES                     SEATTLE              WA

  0WA6        STEVENS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL             EDMONDS              WA

  0WA8        CHILDRENS HOSPITAL EMERGENCY          SEATTLE              WA

  1S0         PIERCE COUNTY - THUN FIELD            PUYALLUP             WA

  1WA1        WEBER POINT                           REDMOND              WA

  1WA6        FALL CITY                             FALL CITY            WA

  1WA8        MADIGAN HOSPITAL                      FORT LEWIS           WA

  23WA        BCAG - FREDERICKSON                   PUYALLUP             WA

  29WA        CROSSINGS                             TACOMA               WA

  2S1         VASHON MUNI                           VASHON               WA

  2WA2        QUARTERMASTER HARBOR                  DOCKTON              WA

  2WA4        MOSS FIELD                            GRAHAM               WA

  31WA        MARY BRIDGE                           TACOMA               WA

  3B8         SHADY ACRES                           SPANAWAY             WA

  3WA6        BOEING KENT                           KENT                 WA

  3WA7        KENT BENAROYA                         KENT                 WA

  43WA        WILSON                                WOODINVILLE          WA

  47WA        FITZ PAD 1                            WOODINVILLE          WA

  51WA        EVERGREEN SKY RANCH                   BLACK DIAMOND        WA

  54WA        TUKWILA OPERATIONS CENTER             TUKWILA              WA

  60WA        J. J. H.                              AUBURN               WA

  64WA        TAYMAR                                BELLEVUE             WA

  71WA        I-90/BELLEVUE BUSI PK BOEING COMP     BELLEVUE             WA
              SVCS H                                                     

  7WA8        GOOD SAMARITAN HOSP                   PUYALLUP             WA

  81WA        JOBE SKIS PLANT 1                     REDMOND              WA

  83Q         PORT OF POULSBO MARINA MOORAGE        POULSBO              WA

  88WA        PERSONAL 500 SALES CO.                SUMNER               WA

  8WA2        BOEING RENTON RAMP SITE NR 2          RENTON               WA

  8WA3        VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER                 RENTON               WA

  8WA8        SNOQUALMIE VALLEY HOSPITAL EMERGENCY  KING COUNTY          WA
              ROOM                                                       

  8WA9        BROADCAST HOUSE HELISTOP              SEATTLE              WA

  92WA        CONNER                                ISSAQUAH             WA

  95WA        BLACK DIAMOND                         BLACK DIAMOND        WA

  9WA0        BOEING PLANT 2                        SEATTLE              WA

  9WA6        PUGET SOUND PLAZA                     SEATTLE              WA

  9WA9        NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE BANGOR           SILVERDALE           WA

  BFI         BOEING FIELD/KING COUNTY INTL         SEATTLE              WA

  PWT         BREMERTON NATIONAL                    BREMERTON            WA

  RNT         RENTON MUNI                           RENTON               WA

  S36         CREST AIRPARK                         KENT                 WA

  S37         CLOVER PARK TECHNICAL COLLEGE         TACOMA               WA

  S42         APEX AIRPARK                          SILVERDALE           WA

  S44         SPANAWAY                              SPANAWAY             WA

  S50         AUBURN MUNI                           AUBURN               WA

  S60         KENMORE AIR HARBOR INC                KENMORE              WA

  TCM         MCCHORD AFB                           TACOMA               WA

  TIW         TACOMA NARROWS                        TACOMA               WA

  W36         WILL ROGERS WILEY POST MEML           RENTON               WA

  W37         AMERICAN LAKE                         TACOMA               WA

  W55         KENMORE AIR HARBOR                    SEATTLE              WA

  WA06        DON JOHNSON HOME                      AUBURN               WA

  WA11        BOEING MILITARY AIRPLANES             TUKWILA              WA

  WA19        BERKLEY STRUCTURES                    REDMOND              WA

  WA28        TOM MATSON                            AUBURN               WA

  WA53        HARBORVIEW MEDICAL CENTER             SEATTLE              WA

  WA54        1001 FOURTH AVENUE PLAZA              SEATTLE              WA

  WA55        ELLIOTT PARK                          SEATTLE              WA

  WA69        WAX ORCHARDS                          VASHON               WA

  WA75        FLYING \'O\' RANCH                    COVINGTON            WA

  WA77        ENUMCLAW                              ENUMCLAW             WA

  WA84        AUBURN ACADEMY                        AUBURN               WA

  WA85        WEYERHAEUSER                          AUBURN               WA

  WA86        BOEING - AUBURN COMPLEX               AUBURN               WA

  WA92        MC NEIL ISLAND EMERGENCY PAD          STEILACOOM           WA

  WA94        WASHINGTON AIR MUSEUM                 BLACK DIAMOND        WA

  WA96        LEISURELAND AIRPARK                   BREMERTON            WA

  WN01        SEATTLE PRIVATE NUMBER ONE            SEATTLE              WA

  WN13        VAUGHAN RANCH AIRFIELD                PORT ORCHARD         WA

  WN16        KOMO TV                               SEATTLE              WA

  WN19        GIG HARBOR                            GIG HARBOR           WA

  WN22        LAKE UNION                            SEATTLE              WA

  WN42        FLYING H RANCH                        BUCKLEY              WA

  WN50        ST JOSEPH HOSPITAL                    TACOMA               WA

  WN62        AUBURN FIRE DEPARTMENT                AUBURN               WA

  WN71        EVANS                                 BELLEVUE             WA

  WN76        BERGSETH FIELD                        ENUMCLAW             WA

  WN79        HALEY                                 WINSLOW              WA

  WN83        TELEPHONE UTILITIES/TIW/              GIG HARBOR           WA

  WN87        BRYAN                                 ENUMCLAW             WA

  WN91        EVANS                                 REDMOND              WA

  WN93        PARK 90                               SEATTLE              WA

  WN96        MISTY ISLE FARMS                      VASHON ISLAND        WA
  ----------- ------------------------------------- -------------------- -----------

### 

### Limitations

Investigation has shown that some double-counting of proximate
facilities exists within the 120 airport list. For example, the list of
proximate facilities for SEA includes BFI, and visa versa.

Final evaluation and certification of service provided to proximate
facilities, if any, is to be determined by the FAA.

## Appendix I: LAAS Benefits Analysis Assumptions

This following list of assumptions was developed, prior to the start of
this analysis, through a series of meetings between IBM and the FAA.
Several of these assumptions have been modified or updated as a result
of new guidance from the FAA (*e.g.*, #3, 4, 6, 13).

One key assumption, regarding airline WAAS equipage (#20), was designed
to be modified through airline stakeholder feedback and the development
of airline benefit estimates. For these preliminary findings, the impact
of this assumption is bounded, as shown in the LAAS benefit tables, by
estimating LAAS benefits for two cases:

1.  assuming no WAAS equipage by users ("0% WAAS"), and

2.  assuming full WAAS equipage by users ("100% WAAS").

+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | **Assumption**                                                    |
| * |                                                                   |
| N |                                                                   |
| o |                                                                   |
| . |                                                                   |
| * |                                                                   |
| * |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | LAAS will accrue benefit only when and where it provides          |
|   | capabilities above and beyond those provided by other systems.    |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Where LAAS provides capabilities above and beyond those provided  |
|   | by other systems, it may reduce flight disruptions, including:    |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | -- Diversions                                                     |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | -- Cancellations                                                  |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | -- Delays (Ground Delay Program and circular holding delays)      |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | LAAS Cat-I Initial Operational Capability (IOC) at end of FY06    |
|   | (changed to FY09; 2/26/04)                                        |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | LAAS Cat-II/III IOC in FY10 (changed to FY13; 2/26/04)            |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | LAAS may be installed at a maximum rate of 2 per month (24/yr),   |
|   | with a cap equal to the number of FAA LAAS airports to be studied |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 | LAAS approach procedures, including complex procedures, will be   |
|   | available at commissioning of each site, for all weather          |
|   | conditions. (changed to 4 months after commissioning; 2/26/04)    |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | LAAS training will keep pace with LAAS procedure development and  |
|   | publication.                                                      |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Appropriate infrastructure will exist at LAAS candidate runways   |
|   | at the time of LAAS installation                                  |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 9 | There may be some decommissioning of ground-based navaids         |
|   | (consistent with the Navigation and Landing Transition Strategy)  |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | LAAS provides no operational improvement during weather           |
| 0 | conditions that would be likely to close the airport.             |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | LAAS, coupled with other technologies, may provide operational    |
| 1 | improvement in extremely low visibility conditions.               |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | WAAS LNAV/VNAV and LPV approach procedures, including complex     |
| 2 | procedures, will be available at or before LAAS commissioning at  |
|   | each site.                                                        |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | WAAS Cat-I requires GPS L5 [and]{.underline} modifications to the |
| 3 | current architecture, and may not be achieved during the time     |
|   | period under study (2005 -- 2024) (changed to 2009 -- 20023;      |
|   | 2/26/04).                                                         |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | GPS L5 frequency will become operationally available after 2015   |
| 4 |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Detailed study of quantitative DoD benefits are beyond the scope  |
| 5 | of this benefits analysis.                                        |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Assume LAAS can be sited at every airport. If all runway ends at  |
| 6 | the airport are within 5 nm\* of each other, assume that one (1)  |
|   | LAAS will cover every runway end. Otherwise, assume that two (2)  |
|   | LAAS are required. (\*Note: This distance will be verified with   |
|   | LAAS SME input)                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | If any navigation system performance assumptions stated herein    |
| 7 | (*SOW*) cannot be achieved at a specific location, then the       |
|   | actual performance parameters will be used.                       |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | RNAV and RNP operations (approaches) intercept a straight-in      |
| 8 | approach at or above 500' HAT.                                    |
| a |                                                                   |
|   | The straight-in approach can be supported by ILS, LAAS, or WAAS,  |
|   | to the appropriate operating minima.                              |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | RNAV and RNP departures and missed approaches have a              |
|   | straight-ahead segment to at least 400' HAT.                      |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | Typical required performance (above 500' HAT on approach, above   |
|   | 400' HAT on missed approach or departure) is RNP-0.1.             |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | GPS/INS, GPS/WAAS and GPS/LAAS all provide an RNP-0.1 capability, |
| 8 | with potentially different levels of service availability         |
| b |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Cat I: The Cat I LAAS should obtain the benefits accruing from:   |
| 8 |                                                                   |
| c | 1\) the reduction in weather minima below those supported by      |
|   | other systems                                                     |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | 2\) greater availability, where demonstrated.                     |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Cat I: LAAS performance would generally achieve Cat I GLS with    |
| 8 | \[0.99999\] availability                                          |
| d |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Cat II/III: The Cat II/III LAAS should obtain the benefits        |
| 9 | accruing from:                                                    |
| a |                                                                   |
|   | 1\) the reduction in weather minima below those supported by      |
|   | other systems                                                     |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | 2\) greater availability, where demonstrated.                     |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | The benefits analysis does not include any decommissioning of Cat |
| 9 | II/III ILS facilities                                             |
| b |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | The *initial* airline equipage assumption is that all users equip |
| 0 | with GPS/WAAS LPV as the baseline.                                |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | The *final* airline equipage assumption will be based on the      |
|   | airline benefit assessment.                                       |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | For efficiency analyses, expected LAAS user groups include:       |
| 1 | High-end GA (corporate turbine; helicopters), and commercial      |
|   | (airline and air-taxi) operators. Low-end (recreational) GA       |
|   | operators are not among the expected users of LAAS and will not   |
|   | be addressed in this efficiency analysis                          |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Navigation capabilities baseline will include:                    |
| 2 |                                                                   |
|   | [NAS Baseline]{.underline} [User Baseline]{.underline}            |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [Current Systems]{.underline}                                     |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [ILS X                                                            |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [WAAS-LPV X                                                       |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [VOR X                                                            |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [DME X                                                            |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [GPS X                                                            |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [Loran X                                                          |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [NDB X                                                            |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [INS                                                              |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [FMS                                                              |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [PRM X                                                            |
|   | \_\_\_                                                            |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [Multilateration X                                                |
|   | \_\_\_                                                            |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [TAWS                                                             |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [HUD                                                              |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Navigation capabilities baseline will include:                    |
| 3 |                                                                   |
|   | [NAS Baseline]{.underline} [User Baseline]{.underline}            |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [Planned Systems]{.underline}                                     |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [WAAS-GLS X                                                       |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [GPS L5 X                                                         |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [GPS -- III X                                                     |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [ASDE-X X                                                         |
|   | \_\_\_\                                                           |
|   | _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [ADS-B X                                                          |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
|   |                                                                   |
|   | [CDTI                                                             |
|   | X\_\_\_                                                           |
|   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | LAAS improves safety by providing vertical guidance               |
| 4 |                                                                   |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | LAAS may be a source of positioning information for surface       |
| 5 | navigation systems                                                |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | For safety analyses covering operations in Alaska, low-end GA     |
| 6 | users, in addition to high-end GA and commercial users, will be   |
|   | considered.                                                       |
+---+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

## Appendix J: LAAS Efficiency Benefits by User Group 

[Table J1: Discounted 20 year LAAS operating cost Benefits -- 0% waas
equipage scenario,]{.smallcaps} by Airport

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   Major Passenger Regional        Cargo Carriers Corporate Jet  Other GA
                Benefit**       Total       Airlines        Passenger                      GA Operators   Operators
                                Benefit**                   Airlines                                      

  ABQ           \$1,916,000     87          \$1,531,000     \$195,000       \$119,000      \$71,000       \$0

  ACK           \$15,486,000    19          \$0             \$12,476,000    \$272,000      \$2,738,000    \$0

  AFW           \$189,000       114         \$0             \$0             \$145,000      \$44,000       \$0

  ALB           \$9,666,000     34          \$5,591,000     \$3,082,000     \$470,000      \$523,000      \$0

  ANC           \$9,343,000     36          \$4,218,000     \$1,461,000     \$2,311,000    \$305,000      \$1,048,000

  ATL           \$38,083,000    4           \$33,403,000    \$3,875,000     \$592,000      \$213,000      \$0

  AUS           \$5,116,000     58          \$4,486,000     \$62,000        \$0            \$568,000      \$0

  AVL           \$2,537,000     82          \$784,000       \$1,049,000     \$1,000        \$703,000      \$0

  BDL           \$15,778,000    18          \$11,278,000    \$2,071,000     \$944,000      \$1,485,000    \$0

  BFI           \$748,000       103         \$0             \$24,000        \$129,000      \$595,000      \$0

  BGR           \$1,153,000     95          \$0             \$693,000       \$61,000       \$399,000      \$0

  BHM           \$7,841,000     43          \$5,243,000     \$757,000       \$204,000      \$1,637,000    \$0

  BNA           \$3,069,000     74          \$2,421,000     \$336,000       \$97,000       \$215,000      \$0

  BOI           \$4,930,000     60          \$2,924,000     \$1,266,000     \$247,000      \$493,000      \$0

  BOS           \$13,168,000    22          \$9,658,000     \$2,892,000     \$222,000      \$396,000      \$0

  BUF           \$6,462,000     51          \$4,251,000     \$1,387,000     \$169,000      \$655,000      \$0

  BUR           \$39,748,000    2           \$37,131,000    \$222,000       \$530,000      \$1,865,000    \$0

  BWI           \$7,207,000     47          \$6,186,000     \$606,000       \$154,000      \$261,000      \$0

  CAE           \$2,069,000     86          \$623,000       \$816,000       \$379,000      \$251,000      \$0

  CHA           \$686,000       106         \$97,000        \$247,000       \$46,000       \$296,000      \$0

  CHS           \$4,906,000     61          \$2,421,000     \$1,657,000     \$135,000      \$693,000      \$0

  CLE           \$18,588,000    14          \$11,789,000    \$5,435,000     \$584,000      \$780,000      \$0

  CLT           \$17,695,000    15          \$14,692,000    \$2,251,000     \$288,000      \$464,000      \$0

  CMH           \$4,608,000     65          \$2,769,000     \$949,000       \$0            \$890,000      \$0

  COS           \$9,272,000     37          \$6,908,000     \$1,123,000     \$258,000      \$983,000      \$0

  CVG           \$37,930,000    5           \$17,373,000    \$16,736,000    \$3,430,000    \$391,000      \$0

  DAB           \$872,000       101         \$390,000       \$84,000        \$0            \$398,000      \$0

  DAL           \$4,409,000     68          \$2,553,000     \$115,000       \$48,000       \$1,693,000    \$0

  DAY           \$2,905,000     76          \$1,322,000     \$774,000       \$514,000      \$295,000      \$0

  DCA           \$30,834,000    6           \$27,088,000    \$3,633,000     \$0            \$113,000      \$0

  DEN           \$21,233,000    12          \$17,882,000    \$2,753,000     \$443,000      \$155,000      \$0

  DFW           \$53,558,000    1           \$42,408,000    \$9,213,000     \$1,841,000    \$96,000       \$0

  DLH           \$1,469,000     91          \$404,000       \$381,000       \$49,000       \$635,000      \$0

  DSM           \$3,004,000     75          \$1,062,000     \$1,133,000     \$387,000      \$422,000      \$0

  DTW           \$28,120,000    8           \$23,566,000    \$3,924,000     \$336,000      \$294,000      \$0

  DVT           \$8,000         120         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$8,000        \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        119         \$6,000         \$0             \$2,000        \$4,000        \$0

  EUG           \$3,887,000     70          \$1,012,000     \$1,891,000     \$469,000      \$515,000      \$0

  EWR           \$12,102,000    24          \$9,911,000     \$1,363,000     \$621,000      \$207,000      \$0

  EYW           \$99,000        117         \$0             \$75,000        \$0            \$24,000       \$0

  FAI           \$709,000       105         \$266,000       \$103,000       \$45,000       \$3,000        \$292,000

  FAT           \$408,000       109         \$16,000        \$345,000       \$19,000       \$28,000       \$0

  FLL           \$2,351,000     84          \$1,762,000     \$380,000       \$67,000       \$142,000      \$0

  FWA           \$2,581,000     81          \$92,000        \$1,392,000     \$704,000      \$393,000      \$0

  FXE           \$105,000       116         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$105,000      \$0

  GEG           \$7,226,000     46          \$4,273,000     \$1,675,000     \$1,063,000    \$215,000      \$0

  GRR           \$6,265,000     52          \$2,204,000     \$2,050,000     \$682,000      \$1,329,000    \$0

  GSO           \$11,775,000    26          \$7,100,000     \$2,524,000     \$943,000      \$1,208,000    \$0

  GSP           \$1,283,000     92          \$497,000       \$583,000       \$60,000       \$143,000      \$0

  HNL           \$4,523,000     67          \$1,528,000     \$2,721,000     \$249,000      \$25,000       \$0

  HOU           \$14,845,000    21          \$10,625,000    \$752,000       \$1,000        \$3,467,000    \$0

  HPN           \$7,740,000     44          \$1,293,000     \$1,489,000     \$0            \$4,958,000    \$0

  HSV           \$391,000       110         \$210,000       \$83,000        \$45,000       \$53,000       \$0

  IAD           \$9,237,000     38          \$5,301,000     \$2,936,000     \$117,000      \$883,000      \$0

  IAH           \$19,545,000    13          \$16,474,000    \$2,555,000     \$215,000      \$301,000      \$0

  ICT           \$5,342,000     56          \$1,940,000     \$805,000       \$422,000      \$2,175,000    \$0

  ILN           \$2,904,000     77          \$0             \$0             \$2,904,000    \$0            \$0

  IND           \$3,413,000     71          \$1,728,000     \$403,000       \$894,000      \$388,000      \$0

  JAN           \$732,000       104         \$431,000       \$122,000       \$45,000       \$134,000      \$0

  JAX           \$4,588,000     66          \$3,481,000     \$491,000       \$198,000      \$418,000      \$0

  JFK           \$17,460,000    16          \$12,146,000    \$3,632,000     \$1,450,000    \$232,000      \$0

  JNU           \$24,577,000    11          \$10,528,000    \$7,701,000     \$1,719,000    \$875,000      \$3,754,000

  LAS           \$344,000       112         \$318,000       \$0             \$0            \$26,000       \$0

  LAX           \$11,351,000    28          \$9,449,000     \$1,414,000     \$287,000      \$201,000      \$0

  LCK           \$122,000       115         \$0             \$0             \$122,000      \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$38,375,000    3           \$31,151,000    \$6,341,000     \$0            \$883,000      \$0

  LGB           \$6,197,000     53          \$3,283,000     \$106,000       \$579,000      \$2,229,000    \$0

  LIT           \$1,191,000     93          \$445,000       \$169,000       \$48,000       \$529,000      \$0

  MCI           \$5,813,000     55          \$4,616,000     \$843,000       \$240,000      \$114,000      \$0

  MCO           \$11,939,000    25          \$8,857,000     \$2,369,000     \$491,000      \$222,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,031,000     98          \$496,000       \$285,000       \$124,000      \$126,000      \$0

  MDW           \$17,152,000    17          \$15,402,000    \$1,408,000     \$30,000       \$312,000      \$0

  MEM           \$9,687,000     33          \$5,417,000     \$1,214,000     \$2,305,000    \$751,000      \$0

  MHT           \$11,619,000    27          \$8,825,000     \$1,554,000     \$931,000      \$309,000      \$0

  MIA           \$2,839,000     78          \$2,132,000     \$369,000       \$235,000      \$103,000      \$0

  MKE           \$12,798,000    23          \$4,652,000     \$6,156,000     \$1,021,000    \$969,000      \$0

  MMU           \$235,000       113         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$235,000      \$0

  MSP           \$27,666,000    9           \$23,929,000    \$3,207,000     \$372,000      \$158,000      \$0

  MSY           \$8,376,000     41          \$7,391,000     \$405,000       \$248,000      \$332,000      \$0

  OAK           \$904,000       99          \$666,000       \$31,000        \$74,000       \$133,000      \$0

  OKC           \$8,381,000     40          \$5,645,000     \$1,269,000     \$495,000      \$972,000      \$0

  OMA           \$1,184,000     94          \$733,000       \$145,000       \$119,000      \$187,000      \$0

  ONT           \$6,666,000     50          \$5,118,000     \$267,000       \$1,188,000    \$93,000       \$0

  ORD           \$29,996,000    7           \$25,972,000    \$3,356,000     \$433,000      \$235,000      \$0

  ORF           \$5,927,000     54          \$3,744,000     \$1,422,000     \$266,000      \$495,000      \$0

  PBI           \$1,509,000     90          \$828,000       \$203,000       \$31,000       \$447,000      \$0

  PDX           \$4,135,000     69          \$2,971,000     \$782,000       \$203,000      \$179,000      \$0

  PHL           \$11,277,000    29          \$8,311,000     \$1,697,000     \$444,000      \$825,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,625,000     89          \$1,454,000     \$68,000        \$50,000       \$53,000       \$0

  PIE           \$831,000       102         \$162,000       \$0             \$66,000       \$603,000      \$0

  PIT           \$10,200,000    32          \$7,620,000     \$2,158,000     \$165,000      \$257,000      \$0

  PVD           \$4,890,000     62          \$2,283,000     \$1,997,000     \$62,000       \$548,000      \$0

  RDU           \$15,144,000    20          \$8,379,000     \$4,962,000     \$350,000      \$1,453,000    \$0

  RFD           \$899,000       100         \$0             \$47,000        \$589,000      \$263,000      \$0

  RIC           \$7,424,000     45          \$4,479,000     \$1,728,000     \$518,000      \$699,000      \$0

  RNO           \$1,071,000     96          \$887,000       \$45,000        \$46,000       \$93,000       \$0

  ROC           \$5,082,000     59          \$2,269,000     \$1,708,000     \$609,000      \$496,000      \$0

  RSW           \$7,079,000     48          \$5,450,000     \$791,000       \$80,000       \$758,000      \$0

  SAN           \$27,315,000    10          \$23,370,000    \$2,227,000     \$463,000      \$1,255,000    \$0

  SAT           \$8,588,000     39          \$6,580,000     \$77,000        \$367,000      \$1,564,000    \$0

  SDF           \$439,000       108         \$196,000       \$42,000        \$169,000      \$32,000       \$0

  SEA           \$10,413,000    31          \$7,692,000     \$2,188,000     \$473,000      \$60,000       \$0

  SFB           \$367,000       111         \$0             \$112,000       \$0            \$255,000      \$0

  SFO           \$5,194,000     57          \$4,632,000     \$355,000       \$58,000       \$149,000      \$0

  SHV           \$1,819,000     88          \$224,000       \$993,000       \$206,000      \$396,000      \$0

  SJC           \$9,480,000     35          \$8,470,000     \$133,000       \$252,000      \$625,000      \$0

  SLC           \$4,771,000     63          \$3,751,000     \$441,000       \$163,000      \$416,000      \$0

  SMF           \$11,168,000    30          \$9,547,000     \$757,000       \$580,000      \$284,000      \$0

  SNA           \$2,378,000     83          \$853,000       \$124,000       \$25,000       \$1,376,000    \$0

  STL           \$6,932,000     49          \$5,964,000     \$692,000       \$65,000       \$211,000      \$0

  SWF           \$645,000       107         \$74,000        \$410,000       \$24,000       \$137,000      \$0

  SYR           \$2,122,000     85          \$965,000       \$864,000       \$155,000      \$138,000      \$0

  TEB           \$7,854,000     42          \$0             \$0             \$39,000       \$7,815,000    \$0

  TLH           \$4,664,000     64          \$712,000       \$2,653,000     \$360,000      \$939,000      \$0

  TPA           \$2,738,000     79          \$2,235,000     \$346,000       \$23,000       \$134,000      \$0

  TRI           \$1,068,000     97          \$139,000       \$517,000       \$33,000       \$379,000      \$0

  TUL           \$3,293,000     73          \$1,861,000     \$564,000       \$142,000      \$726,000      \$0

  TUS           \$56,000        118         \$47,000        \$0             \$0            \$9,000        \$0

  TYS           \$2,592,000     80          \$1,067,000     \$843,000       \$218,000      \$464,000      \$0

  VNY           \$3,410,000     72          \$0             \$0             \$0            \$3,410,000    \$0

  Total         \$996,971,000               \$686,989,000   \$182,603,000   \$44,975,000   \$77,310,000   \$5,094,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -------------

[Table J2: Discounted 20 year LAAS Passenger Time Savings -- 0% waas
equipage scenario,]{.smallcaps} by Airport

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------- -------------- -------------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   Major Passenger Regional        Cargo      Corporate Jet  Other GA
                Benefit**       Total       Airlines        Passenger       Carriers   GA Operators   Operators
                                Benefit**                   Airlines                                  

  ABQ           \$1,734,000     86          \$1,316,000     \$404,000       \$0        \$14,000       \$0

  ACK           \$26,581,000    9           \$0             \$26,081,000    \$0        \$500,000      \$0

  AFW           \$8,000         117         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$8,000        \$0

  ALB           \$11,324,000    27          \$4,825,000     \$6,399,000     \$0        \$100,000      \$0

  ANC           \$6,932,000     44          \$3,472,000     \$3,053,000     \$0        \$56,000       \$351,000

  ATL           \$40,617,000    3           \$33,056,000    \$7,519,000     \$0        \$42,000       \$0

  AUS           \$3,926,000     66          \$3,692,000     \$130,000       \$0        \$104,000      \$0

  AVL           \$2,997,000     71          \$686,000       \$2,174,000     \$0        \$137,000      \$0

  BDL           \$13,884,000    22          \$9,284,000     \$4,329,000     \$0        \$271,000      \$0

  BFI           \$167,000       110         \$0             \$49,000        \$0        \$118,000      \$0

  BGR           \$1,523,000     88          \$0             \$1,450,000     \$0        \$73,000       \$0

  BHM           \$6,197,000     51          \$4,316,000     \$1,582,000     \$0        \$299,000      \$0

  BNA           \$2,734,000     75          \$1,993,000     \$702,000       \$0        \$39,000       \$0

  BOI           \$5,145,000     58          \$2,407,000     \$2,648,000     \$0        \$90,000       \$0

  BOS           \$14,069,000    21          \$7,950,000     \$6,047,000     \$0        \$72,000       \$0

  BUF           \$6,523,000     45          \$3,505,000     \$2,898,000     \$0        \$120,000      \$0

  BUR           \$31,454,000    5           \$30,646,000    \$465,000       \$0        \$343,000      \$0

  BWI           \$6,408,000     47          \$5,092,000     \$1,268,000     \$0        \$48,000       \$0

  CAE           \$2,264,000     83          \$513,000       \$1,705,000     \$0        \$46,000       \$0

  CHA           \$649,000       99          \$80,000        \$515,000       \$0        \$54,000       \$0

  CHS           \$5,584,000     55          \$1,992,000     \$3,465,000     \$0        \$127,000      \$0

  CLE           \$21,208,000    13          \$9,704,000     \$11,362,000    \$0        \$142,000      \$0

  CLT           \$16,885,000    19          \$12,094,000    \$4,706,000     \$0        \$85,000       \$0

  CMH           \$4,543,000     62          \$2,404,000     \$1,968,000     \$0        \$171,000      \$0

  COS           \$8,634,000     35          \$6,119,000     \$2,323,000     \$0        \$192,000      \$0

  CVG           \$46,777,000    2           \$21,620,000    \$25,090,000    \$0        \$67,000       \$0

  DAB           \$602,000       103         \$350,000       \$173,000       \$0        \$79,000       \$0

  DAL           \$2,944,000     72          \$2,366,000     \$236,000       \$0        \$342,000      \$0

  DAY           \$2,775,000     74          \$1,118,000     \$1,602,000     \$0        \$55,000       \$0

  DCA           \$29,915,000    7           \$22,298,000    \$7,596,000     \$0        \$21,000       \$0

  DEN           \$20,503,000    14          \$14,720,000    \$5,755,000     \$0        \$28,000       \$0

  DFW           \$70,062,000    1           \$54,268,000    \$15,774,000    \$0        \$20,000       \$0

  DLH           \$1,266,000     90          \$355,000       \$789,000       \$0        \$122,000      \$0

  DSM           \$3,319,000     69          \$874,000       \$2,368,000     \$0        \$77,000       \$0

  DTW           \$30,025,000    6           \$21,991,000    \$7,986,000     \$0        \$48,000       \$0

  DVT           \$1,000         118         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$1,000        \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        116         \$11,000        \$0             \$0        \$1,000        \$0

  EUG           \$4,930,000     59          \$930,000       \$3,896,000     \$0        \$104,000      \$0

  EWR           \$11,046,000    28          \$8,158,000     \$2,850,000     \$0        \$38,000       \$0

  EYW           \$161,000       111         \$0             \$157,000       \$0        \$4,000        \$0

  FAI           \$534,000       104         \$219,000       \$216,000       \$0        \$1,000        \$98,000

  FAT           \$739,000       98          \$13,000        \$721,000       \$0        \$5,000        \$0

  FLL           \$2,392,000     80          \$1,577,000     \$790,000       \$0        \$25,000       \$0

  FWA           \$3,057,000     70          \$76,000        \$2,909,000     \$0        \$72,000       \$0

  FXE           \$20,000        115         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$20,000       \$0

  GEG           \$7,058,000     40          \$3,517,000     \$3,502,000     \$0        \$39,000       \$0

  GRR           \$6,426,000     46          \$1,915,000     \$4,256,000     \$0        \$255,000      \$0

  GSO           \$11,342,000    25          \$5,845,000     \$5,276,000     \$0        \$221,000      \$0

  GSP           \$1,653,000     87          \$409,000       \$1,218,000     \$0        \$26,000       \$0

  HNL           \$6,952,000     43          \$1,258,000     \$5,689,000     \$0        \$5,000        \$0

  HOU           \$12,275,000    24          \$10,029,000    \$1,550,000     \$0        \$696,000      \$0

  HPN           \$5,344,000     57          \$1,320,000     \$2,980,000     \$0        \$1,044,000    \$0

  HSV           \$357,000       105         \$173,000       \$174,000       \$0        \$10,000       \$0

  IAD           \$10,663,000    33          \$4,364,000     \$6,138,000     \$0        \$161,000      \$0

  IAH           \$19,096,000    15          \$13,884,000    \$5,158,000     \$0        \$54,000       \$0

  ICT           \$3,677,000     68          \$1,597,000     \$1,683,000     \$0        \$397,000      \$0

  ILN           \$0             119         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$0            \$0

  IND           \$2,336,000     81          \$1,423,000     \$842,000       \$0        \$71,000       \$0

  JAN           \$632,000       101         \$354,000       \$254,000       \$0        \$24,000       \$0

  JAX           \$3,968,000     65          \$2,865,000     \$1,027,000     \$0        \$76,000       \$0

  JFK           \$17,715,000    16          \$10,082,000    \$7,592,000     \$0        \$41,000       \$0

  JNU           \$26,198,000    11          \$8,686,000     \$16,094,000    \$0        \$160,000      \$1,258,000

  LAS           \$268,000       107         \$263,000       \$0             \$0        \$5,000        \$0

  LAX           \$10,771,000    31          \$7,778,000     \$2,956,000     \$0        \$37,000       \$0

  LCK           \$0             120         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$39,060,000    4           \$25,642,000    \$13,257,000    \$0        \$161,000      \$0

  LGB           \$3,913,000     67          \$3,350,000     \$217,000       \$0        \$346,000      \$0

  LIT           \$817,000       97          \$367,000       \$353,000       \$0        \$97,000       \$0

  MCI           \$5,584,000     56          \$3,800,000     \$1,763,000     \$0        \$21,000       \$0

  MCO           \$12,591,000    23          \$7,675,000     \$4,875,000     \$0        \$41,000       \$0

  MDT           \$1,068,000     93          \$457,000       \$585,000       \$0        \$26,000       \$0

  MDW           \$16,446,000    20          \$13,470,000    \$2,917,000     \$0        \$59,000       \$0

  MEM           \$7,817,000     37          \$5,195,000     \$2,515,000     \$0        \$107,000      \$0

  MHT           \$10,741,000    32          \$7,445,000     \$3,238,000     \$0        \$58,000       \$0

  MIA           \$2,546,000     79          \$1,755,000     \$772,000       \$0        \$19,000       \$0

  MKE           \$16,891,000    18          \$3,900,000     \$12,818,000    \$0        \$173,000      \$0

  MMU           \$50,000        113         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$50,000       \$0

  MSP           \$26,432,000    10          \$19,698,000    \$6,705,000     \$0        \$29,000       \$0

  MSY           \$6,991,000     42          \$6,084,000     \$846,000       \$0        \$61,000       \$0

  OAK           \$637,000       100         \$548,000       \$65,000        \$0        \$24,000       \$0

  OKC           \$7,502,000     38          \$4,671,000     \$2,652,000     \$0        \$179,000      \$0

  OMA           \$939,000       95          \$603,000       \$302,000       \$0        \$34,000       \$0

  ONT           \$4,789,000     60          \$4,213,000     \$559,000       \$0        \$17,000       \$0

  ORD           \$28,731,000    8           \$21,717,000    \$6,971,000     \$0        \$43,000       \$0

  ORF           \$6,337,000     49          \$3,335,000     \$2,906,000     \$0        \$96,000       \$0

  PBI           \$1,212,000     92          \$703,000       \$424,000       \$0        \$85,000       \$0

  PDX           \$4,127,000     64          \$2,461,000     \$1,634,000     \$0        \$32,000       \$0

  PHL           \$10,813,000    30          \$7,169,000     \$3,492,000     \$0        \$152,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,798,000     85          \$1,654,000     \$132,000       \$0        \$12,000       \$0

  PIE           \$258,000       108         \$142,000       \$0             \$0        \$116,000      \$0

  PIT           \$10,831,000    29          \$6,273,000     \$4,511,000     \$0        \$47,000       \$0

  PVD           \$6,154,000     52          \$1,879,000     \$4,175,000     \$0        \$100,000      \$0

  RDU           \$17,550,000    17          \$6,912,000     \$10,374,000    \$0        \$264,000      \$0

  RFD           \$146,000       112         \$0             \$98,000        \$0        \$48,000       \$0

  RIC           \$7,422,000     39          \$3,693,000     \$3,602,000     \$0        \$127,000      \$0

  RNO           \$862,000       96          \$749,000       \$95,000        \$0        \$18,000       \$0

  ROC           \$5,984,000     53          \$2,849,000     \$3,033,000     \$0        \$102,000      \$0

  RSW           \$6,999,000     41          \$5,230,000     \$1,613,000     \$0        \$156,000      \$0

  SAN           \$24,121,000    12          \$19,237,000    \$4,655,000     \$0        \$229,000      \$0

  SAT           \$5,915,000     54          \$5,466,000     \$161,000       \$0        \$288,000      \$0

  SDF           \$255,000       109         \$161,000       \$88,000        \$0        \$6,000        \$0

  SEA           \$11,332,000    26          \$7,265,000     \$4,056,000     \$0        \$11,000       \$0

  SFB           \$282,000       106         \$0             \$233,000       \$0        \$49,000       \$0

  SFO           \$4,583,000     61          \$3,813,000     \$743,000       \$0        \$27,000       \$0

  SHV           \$2,334,000     82          \$185,000       \$2,077,000     \$0        \$72,000       \$0

  SJC           \$7,984,000     36          \$7,587,000     \$275,000       \$0        \$122,000      \$0

  SLC           \$4,540,000     63          \$3,559,000     \$922,000       \$0        \$59,000       \$0

  SMF           \$9,494,000     34          \$7,859,000     \$1,583,000     \$0        \$52,000       \$0

  SNA           \$2,022,000     84          \$1,498,000     \$247,000       \$0        \$277,000      \$0

  STL           \$6,395,000     48          \$4,910,000     \$1,446,000     \$0        \$39,000       \$0

  SWF           \$943,000       94          \$62,000        \$856,000       \$0        \$25,000       \$0

  SYR           \$2,625,000     77          \$795,000       \$1,805,000     \$0        \$25,000       \$0

  TEB           \$1,464,000     89          \$0             \$0             \$0        \$1,464,000    \$0

  TLH           \$6,310,000     50          \$626,000       \$5,501,000     \$0        \$183,000      \$0

  TPA           \$2,589,000     78          \$1,840,000     \$724,000       \$0        \$25,000       \$0

  TRI           \$1,263,000     91          \$114,000       \$1,080,000     \$0        \$69,000       \$0

  TUL           \$2,844,000     73          \$1,532,000     \$1,179,000     \$0        \$133,000      \$0

  TUS           \$42,000        114         \$40,000        \$0             \$0        \$2,000        \$0

  TYS           \$2,726,000     76          \$879,000       \$1,762,000     \$0        \$85,000       \$0

  VNY           \$632,000       102         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$632,000      \$0

  Total         \$994,534,000               \$612,919,000   \$365,431,000   \$0        \$14,477,000   \$1,707,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------- -------------- -------------

[Table J3: Discounted 20 year LAAS operating cost Benefits -- 100% waas
equipage scenario,]{.smallcaps} by Airport

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -----------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   Major Passenger Regional        Cargo Carriers Corporate Jet  Other GA
                Benefit**       Total       Airlines        Passenger                      GA Operators   Operators
                                Benefit**                   Airlines                                      

  ABQ           \$1,053,000     90          \$831,000       \$104,000       \$77,000       \$41,000       \$0

  ACK           \$10,644,000    20          \$0             \$8,020,000     \$197,000      \$2,427,000    \$0

  AFW           \$189,000       112         \$0             \$0             \$145,000      \$44,000       \$0

  ALB           \$6,969,000     31          \$4,021,000     \$2,202,000     \$355,000      \$391,000      \$0

  ANC           \$5,865,000     38          \$2,728,000     \$946,000       \$1,495,000    \$196,000      \$500,000

  ATL           \$33,189,000    1           \$29,447,000    \$3,125,000     \$437,000      \$180,000      \$0

  AUS           \$5,116,000     46          \$4,486,000     \$62,000        \$0            \$568,000      \$0

  AVL           \$2,537,000     70          \$784,000       \$1,049,000     \$1,000        \$703,000      \$0

  BDL           \$5,358,000     44          \$3,830,000     \$703,000       \$321,000      \$504,000      \$0

  BFI           \$748,000       98          \$0             \$24,000        \$129,000      \$595,000      \$0

  BGR           \$1,153,000     88          \$0             \$693,000       \$61,000       \$399,000      \$0

  BHM           \$1,710,000     76          \$1,156,000     \$166,000       \$33,000       \$355,000      \$0

  BNA           \$1,764,000     75          \$1,460,000     \$125,000       \$41,000       \$138,000      \$0

  BOI           \$3,441,000     59          \$2,091,000     \$827,000       \$167,000      \$356,000      \$0

  BOS           \$13,168,000    14          \$9,658,000     \$2,892,000     \$222,000      \$396,000      \$0

  BUF           \$6,085,000     37          \$4,251,000     \$1,262,000     \$169,000      \$403,000      \$0

  BUR           \$1,282,000     84          \$1,086,000     \$11,000        \$19,000       \$166,000      \$0

  BWI           \$7,207,000     30          \$6,186,000     \$606,000       \$154,000      \$261,000      \$0

  CAE           \$1,375,000     80          \$419,000       \$536,000       \$251,000      \$169,000      \$0

  CHA           \$652,000       100         \$97,000        \$247,000       \$46,000       \$262,000      \$0

  CHS           \$3,641,000     57          \$1,797,000     \$1,230,000     \$101,000      \$513,000      \$0

  CLE           \$6,086,000     36          \$3,617,000     \$1,979,000     \$192,000      \$298,000      \$0

  CLT           \$17,695,000    8           \$14,692,000    \$2,251,000     \$288,000      \$464,000      \$0

  CMH           \$4,608,000     49          \$2,769,000     \$949,000       \$0            \$890,000      \$0

  COS           \$8,378,000     27          \$6,277,000     \$952,000       \$238,000      \$911,000      \$0

  CVG           \$16,160,000    10          \$8,461,000     \$6,414,000     \$1,124,000    \$161,000      \$0

  DAB           \$599,000       101         \$252,000       \$54,000        \$0            \$293,000      \$0

  DAL           \$4,409,000     51          \$2,553,000     \$115,000       \$48,000       \$1,693,000    \$0

  DAY           \$1,797,000     74          \$845,000       \$450,000       \$312,000      \$190,000      \$0

  DCA           \$5,483,000     42          \$4,814,000     \$645,000       \$0            \$24,000       \$0

  DEN           \$21,233,000    6           \$17,882,000    \$2,753,000     \$443,000      \$155,000      \$0

  DFW           \$30,334,000    3           \$25,189,000    \$4,355,000     \$741,000      \$49,000       \$0

  DLH           \$1,397,000     79          \$404,000       \$381,000       \$49,000       \$563,000      \$0

  DSM           \$1,846,000     73          \$758,000       \$552,000       \$221,000      \$315,000      \$0

  DTW           \$15,308,000    11          \$12,937,000    \$2,034,000     \$201,000      \$136,000      \$0

  DVT           \$2,000         120         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$2,000        \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        118         \$6,000         \$0             \$2,000        \$4,000        \$0

  EUG           \$3,268,000     62          \$900,000       \$1,485,000     \$401,000      \$482,000      \$0

  EWR           \$12,102,000    16          \$9,911,000     \$1,363,000     \$621,000      \$207,000      \$0

  EYW           \$35,000        117         \$0             \$24,000        \$0            \$11,000       \$0

  FAI           \$486,000       103         \$266,000       \$103,000       \$45,000       \$3,000        \$69,000

  FAT           \$246,000       110         \$9,000         \$203,000       \$18,000       \$16,000       \$0

  FLL           \$1,348,000     81          \$1,031,000     \$199,000       \$41,000       \$77,000       \$0

  FWA           \$1,088,000     89          \$52,000        \$482,000       \$303,000      \$251,000      \$0

  FXE           \$57,000        116         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$57,000       \$0

  GEG           \$5,497,000     41          \$3,523,000     \$1,047,000     \$743,000      \$184,000      \$0

  GRR           \$4,424,000     50          \$1,636,000     \$1,347,000     \$470,000      \$971,000      \$0

  GSO           \$11,775,000    17          \$7,100,000     \$2,524,000     \$943,000      \$1,208,000    \$0

  GSP           \$1,283,000     83          \$497,000       \$583,000       \$60,000       \$143,000      \$0

  HNL           \$136,000       113         \$50,000        \$86,000        \$0            \$0            \$0

  HOU           \$14,257,000    13          \$10,625,000    \$500,000       \$1,000        \$3,131,000    \$0

  HPN           \$7,570,000     28          \$1,268,000     \$1,430,000     \$0            \$4,872,000    \$0

  HSV           \$391,000       106         \$210,000       \$83,000        \$45,000       \$53,000       \$0

  IAD           \$9,237,000     24          \$5,301,000     \$2,936,000     \$117,000      \$883,000      \$0

  IAH           \$19,545,000    7           \$16,474,000    \$2,555,000     \$215,000      \$301,000      \$0

  ICT           \$4,156,000     53          \$1,525,000     \$585,000       \$314,000      \$1,732,000    \$0

  ILN           \$2,904,000     65          \$0             \$0             \$2,904,000    \$0            \$0

  IND           \$3,413,000     60          \$1,728,000     \$403,000       \$894,000      \$388,000      \$0

  JAN           \$732,000       99          \$431,000       \$122,000       \$45,000       \$134,000      \$0

  JAX           \$3,836,000     55          \$2,931,000     \$396,000       \$156,000      \$353,000      \$0

  JFK           \$12,388,000    15          \$9,489,000     \$1,843,000     \$872,000      \$184,000      \$0

  JNU           \$798,000       97          \$342,000       \$245,000       \$64,000       \$33,000       \$114,000

  LAS           \$62,000        115         \$58,000        \$0             \$0            \$4,000        \$0

  LAX           \$11,351,000    18          \$9,449,000     \$1,414,000     \$287,000      \$201,000      \$0

  LCK           \$122,000       114         \$0             \$0             \$122,000      \$0            \$0

  LGA           \$30,600,000    2           \$24,838,000    \$5,056,000     \$0            \$706,000      \$0

  LGB           \$2,952,000     64          \$1,548,000     \$61,000        \$419,000      \$924,000      \$0

  LIT           \$803,000       96          \$445,000       \$121,000       \$26,000       \$211,000      \$0

  MCI           \$5,813,000     40          \$4,616,000     \$843,000       \$240,000      \$114,000      \$0

  MCO           \$6,755,000     33          \$5,317,000     \$1,044,000     \$258,000      \$136,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,031,000     91          \$496,000       \$285,000       \$124,000      \$126,000      \$0

  MDW           \$16,989,000    9           \$15,402,000    \$1,408,000     \$30,000       \$149,000      \$0

  MEM           \$7,414,000     29          \$3,714,000     \$1,176,000     \$2,191,000    \$333,000      \$0

  MHT           \$9,483,000     22          \$7,193,000     \$1,265,000     \$770,000      \$255,000      \$0

  MIA           \$1,603,000     78          \$1,220,000     \$196,000       \$131,000      \$56,000       \$0

  MKE           \$5,366,000     43          \$1,924,000     \$2,618,000     \$439,000      \$385,000      \$0

  MMU           \$235,000       111         \$0             \$0             \$0            \$235,000      \$0

  MSP           \$27,666,000    5           \$23,929,000    \$3,207,000     \$372,000      \$158,000      \$0

  MSY           \$6,257,000     34          \$5,583,000     \$254,000       \$164,000      \$256,000      \$0

  OAK           \$807,000       95          \$666,000       \$6,000         \$74,000       \$61,000       \$0

  OKC           \$5,067,000     47          \$3,580,000     \$581,000       \$260,000      \$646,000      \$0

  OMA           \$1,184,000     86          \$733,000       \$145,000       \$119,000      \$187,000      \$0

  ONT           \$3,098,000     63          \$2,533,000     \$81,000        \$436,000      \$48,000       \$0

  ORD           \$29,996,000    4           \$25,972,000    \$3,356,000     \$433,000      \$235,000      \$0

  ORF           \$5,848,000     39          \$3,707,000     \$1,395,000     \$259,000      \$487,000      \$0

  PBI           \$1,018,000     92          \$571,000       \$95,000        \$13,000       \$339,000      \$0

  PDX           \$4,089,000     54          \$2,934,000     \$782,000       \$203,000      \$170,000      \$0

  PHL           \$10,844,000    19          \$8,311,000     \$1,501,000     \$444,000      \$588,000      \$0

  PHX           \$1,625,000     77          \$1,454,000     \$68,000        \$50,000       \$53,000       \$0

  PIE           \$484,000       104         \$97,000        \$0             \$45,000       \$342,000      \$0

  PIT           \$10,200,000    21          \$7,620,000     \$2,158,000     \$165,000      \$257,000      \$0

  PVD           \$3,690,000     56          \$2,283,000     \$1,053,000     \$62,000       \$292,000      \$0

  RDU           \$15,084,000    12          \$8,342,000     \$4,962,000     \$350,000      \$1,430,000    \$0

  RFD           \$305,000       109         \$0             \$10,000        \$187,000      \$108,000      \$0

  RIC           \$4,664,000     48          \$2,823,000     \$1,081,000     \$321,000      \$439,000      \$0

  RNO           \$496,000       102         \$408,000       \$20,000        \$22,000       \$46,000       \$0

  ROC           \$2,843,000     67          \$1,439,000     \$864,000       \$265,000      \$275,000      \$0

  RSW           \$6,093,000     35          \$4,671,000     \$670,000       \$70,000       \$682,000      \$0

  SAN           \$2,692,000     68          \$2,306,000     \$220,000       \$45,000       \$121,000      \$0

  SAT           \$8,588,000     25          \$6,580,000     \$77,000        \$367,000      \$1,564,000    \$0

  SDF           \$439,000       105         \$196,000       \$42,000        \$169,000      \$32,000       \$0

  SEA           \$9,416,000     23          \$7,073,000     \$1,901,000     \$390,000      \$52,000       \$0

  SFB           \$334,000       107         \$0             \$112,000       \$0            \$222,000      \$0

  SFO           \$5,194,000     45          \$4,632,000     \$355,000       \$58,000       \$149,000      \$0

  SHV           \$1,004,000     93          \$224,000       \$453,000       \$145,000      \$182,000      \$0

  SJC           \$4,360,000     52          \$3,855,000     \$48,000        \$131,000      \$326,000      \$0

  SLC           \$3,376,000     61          \$2,588,000     \$441,000       \$163,000      \$184,000      \$0

  SMF           \$8,383,000     26          \$7,245,000     \$512,000       \$409,000      \$217,000      \$0

  SNA           \$1,911,000     72          \$853,000       \$70,000        \$25,000       \$963,000      \$0

  STL           \$6,932,000     32          \$5,964,000     \$692,000       \$65,000       \$211,000      \$0

  SWF           \$330,000       108         \$74,000        \$124,000       \$24,000       \$108,000      \$0

  SYR           \$1,240,000     85          \$637,000       \$423,000       \$87,000       \$93,000       \$0

  TEB           \$2,099,000     71          \$0             \$0             \$9,000        \$2,090,000    \$0

  TLH           \$3,594,000     58          \$617,000       \$1,878,000     \$286,000      \$813,000      \$0

  TPA           \$1,168,000     87          \$954,000       \$148,000       \$10,000       \$56,000       \$0

  TRI           \$1,004,000     94          \$139,000       \$502,000       \$33,000       \$330,000      \$0

  TUL           \$2,855,000     66          \$1,861,000     \$359,000       \$109,000      \$526,000      \$0

  TUS           \$4,000         119         \$2,000         \$0             \$0            \$2,000        \$0

  TYS           \$2,592,000     69          \$1,067,000     \$843,000       \$218,000      \$464,000      \$0

  VNY           \$1,289,000     82          \$0             \$0             \$0            \$1,289,000    \$0

  Total         \$680,206,000               \$481,826,000   \$116,234,000   \$29,646,000   \$51,817,000   \$683,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- -----------

[Table J4: Discounted 20 year LAAS Passenger Time Savings -- 100% waas
equipage scenario,]{.smallcaps} by Airport

  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------- ------------- -----------
  **Airport**   **Total         **Rank by   Major Passenger Regional        Cargo      Corporate Jet Other GA
                Benefit**       Total       Airlines        Passenger       Carriers   GA Operators  Operators
                                Benefit**                   Airlines                                 

  ABQ           \$962,000       89          \$740,000       \$214,000       \$0        \$8,000       \$0

  ACK           \$17,210,000    10          \$0             \$16,767,000    \$0        \$443,000     \$0

  AFW           \$8,000         116         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$8,000       \$0

  ALB           \$8,169,000     25          \$3,532,000     \$4,561,000     \$0        \$76,000      \$0

  ANC           \$4,426,000     48          \$2,245,000     \$1,977,000     \$0        \$36,000      \$168,000

  ATL           \$32,484,000    2           \$26,113,000    \$6,337,000     \$0        \$34,000      \$0

  AUS           \$3,926,000     56          \$3,692,000     \$130,000       \$0        \$104,000     \$0

  AVL           \$2,997,000     61          \$686,000       \$2,174,000     \$0        \$137,000     \$0

  BDL           \$4,715,000     43          \$3,153,000     \$1,470,000     \$0        \$92,000      \$0

  BFI           \$167,000       108         \$0             \$49,000        \$0        \$118,000     \$0

  BGR           \$1,523,000     75          \$0             \$1,450,000     \$0        \$73,000      \$0

  BHM           \$1,364,000     80          \$952,000       \$347,000       \$0        \$65,000      \$0

  BNA           \$1,489,000     77          \$1,202,000     \$262,000       \$0        \$25,000      \$0

  BOI           \$3,516,000     57          \$1,722,000     \$1,729,000     \$0        \$65,000      \$0

  BOS           \$14,069,000    14          \$7,950,000     \$6,047,000     \$0        \$72,000      \$0

  BUF           \$6,216,000     34          \$3,505,000     \$2,637,000     \$0        \$74,000      \$0

  BUR           \$1,030,000     88          \$975,000       \$23,000        \$0        \$32,000      \$0

  BWI           \$6,408,000     31          \$5,092,000     \$1,268,000     \$0        \$48,000      \$0

  CAE           \$1,498,000     76          \$345,000       \$1,122,000     \$0        \$31,000      \$0

  CHA           \$643,000       94          \$80,000        \$515,000       \$0        \$48,000      \$0

  CHS           \$4,145,000     51          \$1,479,000     \$2,572,000     \$0        \$94,000      \$0

  CLE           \$7,169,000     27          \$2,977,000     \$4,137,000     \$0        \$55,000      \$0

  CLT           \$16,885,000    11          \$12,094,000    \$4,706,000     \$0        \$85,000      \$0

  CMH           \$4,543,000     47          \$2,404,000     \$1,968,000     \$0        \$171,000     \$0

  COS           \$7,745,000     26          \$5,599,000     \$1,967,000     \$0        \$179,000     \$0

  CVG           \$19,652,000    7           \$8,342,000     \$11,282,000    \$0        \$28,000      \$0

  DAB           \$406,000       100         \$236,000       \$110,000       \$0        \$60,000      \$0

  DAL           \$2,944,000     62          \$2,366,000     \$236,000       \$0        \$342,000     \$0

  DAY           \$1,681,000     73          \$716,000       \$930,000       \$0        \$35,000      \$0

  DCA           \$5,315,000     39          \$3,963,000     \$1,348,000     \$0        \$4,000       \$0

  DEN           \$20,503,000    6           \$14,720,000    \$5,755,000     \$0        \$28,000      \$0

  DFW           \$33,321,000    1           \$24,962,000    \$8,349,000     \$0        \$10,000      \$0

  DLH           \$1,253,000     82          \$355,000       \$789,000       \$0        \$109,000     \$0

  DSM           \$1,836,000     69          \$624,000       \$1,154,000     \$0        \$58,000      \$0

  DTW           \$16,168,000    13          \$12,108,000    \$4,035,000     \$0        \$25,000      \$0

  DVT           \$0             118         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$0           \$0

  ELP           \$12,000        114         \$11,000        \$0             \$0        \$1,000       \$0

  EUG           \$3,982,000     54          \$837,000       \$3,047,000     \$0        \$98,000      \$0

  EWR           \$11,046,000    18          \$8,158,000     \$2,850,000     \$0        \$38,000      \$0

  EYW           \$52,000        110         \$0             \$50,000        \$0        \$2,000       \$0

  FAI           \$459,000       97          \$219,000       \$216,000       \$0        \$1,000       \$23,000

  FAT           \$436,000       98          \$8,000         \$425,000       \$0        \$3,000       \$0

  FLL           \$1,342,000     81          \$916,000       \$411,000       \$0        \$15,000      \$0

  FWA           \$1,095,000     86          \$43,000        \$1,006,000     \$0        \$46,000      \$0

  FXE           \$11,000        115         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$11,000      \$0

  GEG           \$5,123,000     42          \$2,900,000     \$2,189,000     \$0        \$34,000      \$0

  GRR           \$4,423,000     49          \$1,447,000     \$2,787,000     \$0        \$189,000     \$0

  GSO           \$11,342,000    17          \$5,845,000     \$5,276,000     \$0        \$221,000     \$0

  GSP           \$1,653,000     74          \$409,000       \$1,218,000     \$0        \$26,000      \$0

  HNL           \$221,000       107         \$41,000        \$180,000       \$0        \$0           \$0

  HOU           \$11,686,000    16          \$10,029,000    \$1,023,000     \$0        \$634,000     \$0

  HPN           \$5,187,000     40          \$1,275,000     \$2,888,000     \$0        \$1,024,000   \$0

  HSV           \$357,000       102         \$173,000       \$174,000       \$0        \$10,000      \$0

  IAD           \$10,663,000    21          \$4,364,000     \$6,138,000     \$0        \$161,000     \$0

  IAH           \$19,096,000    8           \$13,884,000    \$5,158,000     \$0        \$54,000      \$0

  ICT           \$2,794,000     63          \$1,256,000     \$1,222,000     \$0        \$316,000     \$0

  ILN           \$0             119         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$0           \$0

  IND           \$2,336,000     67          \$1,423,000     \$842,000       \$0        \$71,000      \$0

  JAN           \$632,000       95          \$354,000       \$254,000       \$0        \$24,000      \$0

  JAX           \$3,304,000     58          \$2,412,000     \$827,000       \$0        \$65,000      \$0

  JFK           \$11,697,000    15          \$7,811,000     \$3,853,000     \$0        \$33,000      \$0

  JNU           \$853,000       91          \$301,000       \$507,000       \$0        \$7,000       \$38,000

  LAS           \$50,000        111         \$49,000        \$0             \$0        \$1,000       \$0

  LAX           \$10,771,000    20          \$7,778,000     \$2,956,000     \$0        \$37,000      \$0

  LCK           \$0             120         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$0           \$0

  LGA           \$31,144,000    3           \$20,445,000    \$10,570,000    \$0        \$129,000     \$0

  LGB           \$1,822,000     71          \$1,524,000     \$124,000       \$0        \$174,000     \$0

  LIT           \$657,000       93          \$367,000       \$252,000       \$0        \$38,000      \$0

  MCI           \$5,584,000     37          \$3,800,000     \$1,763,000     \$0        \$21,000      \$0

  MCO           \$6,893,000     30          \$4,761,000     \$2,106,000     \$0        \$26,000      \$0

  MDT           \$1,068,000     87          \$457,000       \$585,000       \$0        \$26,000      \$0

  MDW           \$16,416,000    12          \$13,470,000    \$2,917,000     \$0        \$29,000      \$0

  MEM           \$5,578,000     38          \$3,068,000     \$2,454,000     \$0        \$56,000      \$0

  MHT           \$8,783,000     24          \$6,102,000     \$2,633,000     \$0        \$48,000      \$0

  MIA           \$1,423,000     79          \$1,004,000     \$409,000       \$0        \$10,000      \$0

  MKE           \$7,112,000     28          \$1,620,000     \$5,422,000     \$0        \$70,000      \$0

  MMU           \$50,000        112         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$50,000      \$0

  MSP           \$26,432,000    5           \$19,698,000    \$6,705,000     \$0        \$29,000      \$0

  MSY           \$5,174,000     41          \$4,596,000     \$531,000       \$0        \$47,000      \$0

  OAK           \$571,000       96          \$548,000       \$12,000        \$0        \$11,000      \$0

  OKC           \$4,305,000     50          \$2,972,000     \$1,214,000     \$0        \$119,000     \$0

  OMA           \$939,000       90          \$603,000       \$302,000       \$0        \$34,000      \$0

  ONT           \$2,264,000     68          \$2,085,000     \$170,000       \$0        \$9,000       \$0

  ORD           \$28,731,000    4           \$21,717,000    \$6,971,000     \$0        \$43,000      \$0

  ORF           \$6,261,000     33          \$3,289,000     \$2,877,000     \$0        \$95,000      \$0

  PBI           \$754,000       92          \$492,000       \$197,000       \$0        \$65,000      \$0

  PDX           \$4,080,000     53          \$2,415,000     \$1,634,000     \$0        \$31,000      \$0

  PHL           \$10,361,000    22          \$7,169,000     \$3,083,000     \$0        \$109,000     \$0

  PHX           \$1,798,000     72          \$1,654,000     \$132,000       \$0        \$12,000      \$0

  PIE           \$157,000       109         \$89,000        \$0             \$0        \$68,000      \$0

  PIT           \$10,831,000    19          \$6,273,000     \$4,511,000     \$0        \$47,000      \$0

  PVD           \$4,133,000     52          \$1,879,000     \$2,201,000     \$0        \$53,000      \$0

  RDU           \$17,502,000    9           \$6,867,000     \$10,374,000    \$0        \$261,000     \$0

  RFD           \$40,000        113         \$0             \$20,000        \$0        \$20,000      \$0

  RIC           \$4,661,000     44          \$2,327,000     \$2,254,000     \$0        \$80,000      \$0

  RNO           \$404,000       101         \$354,000       \$41,000        \$0        \$9,000       \$0

  ROC           \$3,140,000     59          \$1,400,000     \$1,687,000     \$0        \$53,000      \$0

  RSW           \$6,091,000     35          \$4,588,000     \$1,361,000     \$0        \$142,000     \$0

  SAN           \$2,381,000     65          \$1,898,000     \$461,000       \$0        \$22,000      \$0

  SAT           \$5,915,000     36          \$5,466,000     \$161,000       \$0        \$288,000     \$0

  SDF           \$255,000       105         \$161,000       \$88,000        \$0        \$6,000       \$0

  SEA           \$10,249,000    23          \$6,502,000     \$3,737,000     \$0        \$10,000      \$0

  SFB           \$276,000       104         \$0             \$233,000       \$0        \$43,000      \$0

  SFO           \$4,583,000     46          \$3,813,000     \$743,000       \$0        \$27,000      \$0

  SHV           \$1,165,000     84          \$185,000       \$947,000       \$0        \$33,000      \$0

  SJC           \$3,952,000     55          \$3,788,000     \$96,000        \$0        \$68,000      \$0

  SLC           \$3,083,000     60          \$2,130,000     \$922,000       \$0        \$31,000      \$0

  SMF           \$7,072,000     29          \$5,963,000     \$1,069,000     \$0        \$40,000      \$0

  SNA           \$1,834,000     70          \$1,498,000     \$134,000       \$0        \$202,000     \$0

  STL           \$6,395,000     32          \$4,910,000     \$1,446,000     \$0        \$39,000      \$0

  SWF           \$340,000       103         \$62,000        \$258,000       \$0        \$20,000      \$0

  SYR           \$1,427,000     78          \$525,000       \$885,000       \$0        \$17,000      \$0

  TEB           \$418,000       99          \$0             \$0             \$0        \$418,000     \$0

  TLH           \$4,588,000     45          \$548,000       \$3,880,000     \$0        \$160,000     \$0

  TPA           \$1,104,000     85          \$785,000       \$309,000       \$0        \$10,000      \$0

  TRI           \$1,223,000     83          \$114,000       \$1,049,000     \$0        \$60,000      \$0

  TUL           \$2,379,000     66          \$1,532,000     \$751,000       \$0        \$96,000      \$0

  TUS           \$3,000         117         \$3,000         \$0             \$0        \$0           \$0

  TYS           \$2,726,000     64          \$879,000       \$1,762,000     \$0        \$85,000      \$0

  VNY           \$244,000       106         \$0             \$0             \$0        \$244,000     \$0

  Total         \$663,780,000               \$415,267,000   \$238,357,000   \$0        \$9,927,000   \$229,000
  ------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------- ------------- -----------

## Appendix K: Data Sources

### Air traffic data 

-   Growth rates: Terminal Area Forecast (TAF)

-   Scheduled traffic: Official Airline Guide (OAG) and Flight Schedule
    Data System (FSDS)

-   Unscheduled IFR traffic: Enhanced Traffic Management System (ETMS)

-   VFR traffic: FAA Operations Network (OPSNET) data

-   Cargo traffic: DOT TranStats Schedule T-3 data; Cargo airlines

### Weather data

-   National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) surface weather observations

### Flight data

-   Airline Service Quality Performance (ASQP) database

-   Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) database

### Airport data

-   National Flight Data Center

-   DOT/FAA U.S. Terminal Procedures

-   FAA Airport Capacity Benchmark Report

-   FAA Operational Evolution Plan

-   FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement reports

-   FAA ASD-430 Airport capacity and configuration data

-   FAA National Airspace System Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years
    2004 -- 2008

-   FAA Blueprint for NAS Modernization

### Safety data

-   National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident and incident
    investigation database

-   National Airspace Incidents Monitoring System (NAIMS)

-   NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS)

## Appendix L: List of Acronyms

ACE Aviation Capacity Enhancement

ADS-B Automatic Dependent Surveillance -- Broadcast

AILS Airborne Information for Lateral Spacing

AIP Airport Improvement Program

ANP Actual Navigation Performance

APO Office of Aviation Policy and Plans

ASDE-X Airport Surface Detection Equipment -- neXt generation

ASPM Aviation System Performance Metrics

ASQP Airline Service Quality Program

ATC Air Traffic Control

ATM Air Traffic Management

CAASD Center for Advanced Aviation System Development

CDTI Cockpit Display of Traffic Information

CFIT Controlled Flight Into Terrain

CNS Communication Navigation Surveillance

CONOPS Concept of Operations

CONUS Continental United States

DH Decision Height

DME Distance Measuring Equipment

DOC Direct Operating Cost

EGNOS European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service

ETMS Enhanced Traffic Management System

EVS Enhanced Vision System

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FMS Flight Management System

GA General Aviation

GAME GPS Approach Model Estimator

GAO General Accounting Office

GBAS Ground Based Augmentation System

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GLS GNSS Landing System

GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS Global Positioning System

GPS-III Next-generation GPS

GS Glide Slope

HUD Head-Up Display

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

IFR Instrument Flight Rules

ILS Instrument Landing System

IMC Instrument Meteorological Conditions

IRU Inertial Reference Unit\
LAAS Local Area Augmentation System

LGF LAAS Ground Facility

LNAV Lateral Navigation

LOC Localizer

LPV Lateral Precision with Vertical Guidance

MMR Multi-Mode Receiver

MSAS MTSAT Space Augmentation System

MTSAT Multi-functional Transport Satellite

MVMC Marginal VMC

NAS National Airspace System

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NCDC National Climatic Data Center

NDB Non-Directional Beacon

NFDC National Flight Data Center

NPA Non-Precision Approach

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board

OAG Official Airline Guide

OMB Office of Management and Budget

O&M Operations and Maintenance

PFC Passenger Facility Charge

PRM Precision Runway Monitor

PTS Passenger Time Savings

PVT Position, Velocity, Time

RNAV Area Navigation

RNP Required Navigation Performance

RPM Revenue Passenger Mile

RTM Revenue Ton Mile

RVR Runway Visual Range

SARPS Standards and Recommended Practices

SBAS Space Based Augmentation System

SOIT Satellite Operational Integration Team

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TAWS Terrain Awareness and Warning System

TERPS Terminal Instrument Procedures

VDB VHF Data Broadcast

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VHF Very High Frequency

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions

VOR VHF Omni-directional Range

WAAS Wide Area Augmentation System

WAAS-GLS WAAS GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) Landing System

WAAS-LPV WAAS procedures with vertical guidance

# [Notes and References]{.smallcaps}

[^1]: ^See\ Appendix\ A\ for\ the\ selection\ criteria,\ as\ well\ as\ a\ listing\ and\ map\ of\ these\ 120\ airports.^

[^2]: ^Rovinsky,\ Dr.\ Robert.\ (1999,\ September\ 25).\ Satellite\ Navigation\ Investment\ Analysis\ Report.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration,\ 1-129.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.faa.gov/asd/satnav/fullyrelease.pdf^

[^3]: ^Gustafson,\ David\ M.,\ Smith,\ Alexander\ E.,\ Cassell,\ Rick.\ (October\ 1998).\ Cost\ Benefit\ Analysis\ of\ the\ Combined\ WAAS/LAAS\ System.\ AIAA\ Digital\ Avionics\ Systems\ Conference,\ 1-8.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.aviationtoday.com/reports/costbenefit.pdf^

[^4]: ^Prabhakar,\ Anand\ S.\ (1996).\ Economic\ Analysis\ of\ Local\ Area\ Augmentation\ System\ and\ Alternative\ Architectures\ (Rep.\ No.\ A560803).\ Massachusetts:\ Transportation\ Systems\ Center.^

[^5]: ^No\ Author.\ (1997).\ Local\ Area\ Augmentation\ System\ Cost\ Savings\ Potential.\ Washington,\ DC:\ Air\ Transport\ Association.^

[^6]: ^LAAS\ Benefits\ Analysis\ -\ Executive\ Summary\ of\ the\ Navigation\ Capabilities\ Baseline,\ IBM\ Corporation,\ November\ 2003.^

[^7]: ^LAAS\ Benefits\ Analysis\ -\ Executive\ Summary\ of\ the\ LAAS\ Incremental\ Capabilities,\ IBM\ Corporation,\ December\ 15,\ 2003.^

[^8]: ^No\ Author.\ (2004,\ March).\ FAA\ Aerospace\ Forecast\ 2004-2015.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration,\ Chapter\ 1.\ http://www.api.faa.gov/foreca03/start.htm^

[^9]: ^Beatty,\ R.,\ Hsu,\ R.,\ Berry,\ L,\ and\ Rome,\ J.\ (Dec.\ 1998)\ Preliminary\ Evaluation\ of\ Flight\ Delay\ Propagation\ Through\ an\ Airline\ Schedule;\ 2nd\ USA/Europe\ Air\ Traffic\ Management\ R&D\ Seminar.^

    ^Rome,\ J,\ Rose,\ S,\ Lee,\ R,\ Cistone,\ J,\ Bell,\ G.,\ Leber,\ W.\ (undated)\ Ripple\ Delay\ and\ Its\ Mitigation.^

    ^No\ Author,\ Nov\ 2003,\ Investment\ Analysis\ Benefit\ Guidelines:\ Quantifying\ Benefits\ from\ Projected\ Reductions\ in\ National\ Airspace\ System\ Equipment\ Outages;\ FAA\ ASD-430;\ Appendix\ A,\ p.\ A-3.^

    ^Welch,\ Andrews\ and\ Robinson,\ Aug\ 2001,\ Assessing\ Delay\ Benefits\ of\ the\ Final\ Approach\ Spacing\ Tool,\ MIT\ Lincoln\ Labs,\ and\ NASA\ Ames\ Research\ Center,\ presented\ at\ the\ AAIA\ Guidance,\ Navigation\ and\ Control\ Conference,\ Aug\ 2001.^

[^10]: ^No\ Author.\ (1992,\ October\ 29).\ Guidelines\ and\ Discount\ Rates\ for\ Benefit-Cost\ Analysis\ of\ Federal\ Programs.\ Office\ of\ Management\ and\ Budget^

[^11]: ^See\ Appendix\ J\ for\ a\ listing\ of\ LAAS\ Benefits\ by\ User\ Group\ and\ by\ Airport.^

[^12]: ^See\ Appendix\ F.^

[^13]: ^Hawkins,\ Joseph\ A.\ (1983,\ September).\ Establishment\ and\ Discontinuance\ Criteria\ for\ Precision\ Landing\ Systems.\ US\ Department\ of\ Transportation\ and\ The\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration,\ 1-102.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://api.hq.faa.gov/precision%20landing%20systems/Precision%20Landing%20Systems.pdf^

[^14]: ^Haro,\ Pablo;\ Mateo,\ Mariluz\ de;\ Andrada,\ Luis.\ (1998,\ October\ 7).\ Methodology\ and\ Quantification\ of\ Several\ EGNOS\ Operational\ Benefits.\ Ministry\ of\ Public\ Works\ and\ the\ Economy,\ 1-6.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://www.mfom.es/aviacioncivil/programas/egnos_html/cba.doc^

[^15]: ^See\ for\ example:\ a)\ Pervan,\ Boris;\ Lawrence,\ David;\ Gromov,\ Konstantin.\ (1998,\ March\ 19).\ Flight\ Test\ Evaluation\ of\ a\ Prototype\ Local\ Area\ Augmentation\ System\ Architecture.\ Department\ of\ Aeronautics\ and\ Astronautics,^

    ^1-9.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ <http://waas.stanford.edu/~wwu/papers/gps/PDF/flight_eval_laas_bsp97.pdf>^

    ^b)\ Hammer,\ Jonathan.\ (2000).\ Case\ Study\ of\ Paired\ Approach\ Procedure\ to\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Runways.\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation,\ 223-252.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://www.mitre.org/work/best_papers/best_papers_00/hammer_casestudy/hammer_casestudy.pdf^

[^16]: ^http://www.transtats.bts.gov/^

[^17]: ^http://www.faa.gov/ats/asc/capacity.html^

[^18]: ^Hawkins,\ Joseph\ A.\ (1983).\ Establishment\ and\ Discontinuance\ Criteria\ for\ Precision\ Landing\ Systems\ (Rep.\ No.\ FAA-APO-83-10).\ Washington,\ DC:\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.^

[^19]: ^Prabhakar,\ Anand\ S.\ (1996).\ Economic\ Analysis\ of\ Local\ Area\ Augmentation\ System\ and\ Alternative\ Architectures\ (Rep.\ No.\ A560803).\ Massachusetts:\ Transportation\ Systems\ Center.^

[^20]: ^NCDC\ data\ provided\ by\ ASD-400.^

[^21]: ^Details\ of\ the\ derivation\ of\ disruption\ costs\ are\ in\ Appendix\ C.^

[^22]: ^The\ period\ from\ 9/11/01\ through\ 12/31/01\ was\ omitted.^

[^23]: ^No\ Author.\ (1992,\ October\ 29).\ Guidelines\ and\ Discount\ Rates\ for\ Benefit-Cost\ Analysis\ of\ Federal\ Programs.\ Office\ of\ Management\ and\ Budget.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a094/a094.html#7^

[^24]: ^For\ a\ discussion\ of\ the\ impact\ of\ severe\ weather\ on\ airline\ operations,\ see\ for\ example,\ Zalman,\ Shavell\ A.\ (2000,\ April\ 15).\ The\ Effects\ of\ Schedule\ Disruptions\ on\ the\ Economics\ of\ Airline\ Operations.\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation,\ 1-11.\ Retrieved\ May\ 18,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.mitre.org/work/tech_papers/tech_papers_00/shavell_effects/shavell_effects.pdf^

[^25]: ^For\ details\ see\ FAA\ Advisory\ Circulars\ 120-29A,\ 120-28D;\ FAA\ Order\ 8400.10^

[^26]: ^See\ Appendix\ E\ for\ a\ description\ of\ how\ total\ demand\ is\ estimate.^

[^27]: ^Capacity\ data\ was\ made\ available\ to\ IBM\ by\ the\ FAA's\ ASD-400^

[^28]: ^See\ Appendix\ E\ for\ a\ description\ of\ how\ a\ "typical"\ day's\ traffic\ is\ estimated^

[^29]: ^See\ Appendix\ E\ for\ a\ description\ of\ the\ Single\ Airport\ Delay\ Model.^

[^30]: ^See\ Appendix\ C.^

[^31]: ^Becher,\ T.;\ Formosa,\ J.\ (2000,\ June\ 16).\ RNAV\ Near-Term\ Terminal\ Procedures\ Development.\ Center\ for\ Advanced\ Aviation\ System\ Development,\ 1-11.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://www.mitrecaasd.org/library/presentations/becher.pdf^

[^32]: ^Hoitomt,\ Debra;\ Dareing,\ Stephen;\ Tang,\ Baoxing.\ (No\ Date\ Given).\ Traffic\ Management\ and\ Airline\ Operations.\ United\ Airlines\ Research\ Center,\ 1-3.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://icat-server.mit.edu/\~fcarr/ACC2002/Abstracts/UAL_Hoitomt.pdf^

[^33]: ^Knorr,\ David.\ (2000,\ June\ 16).\ The\ Operational\ Assessment\ of\ Free\ Flight\ Phase\ 1\ ATM\ Capabilities.\ Free\ Flight\ Phase\ 1\ Program\ Office,\ 1-9.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.mitrecaasd.org/library/presentations/blucher.pdf^

[^34]: ^See\ for\ example:\ a)\ Testimony\ before\ the\ Aviation\ Subcommittee\ of\ the\ House\ Committee\ on\ Transportation\ and\ Infrastructure,\ (1999,\ October\ 14).\ http://www.house.gov/transportation/aviation/hearing/10-14-99/chew.html^

    ^b)\ No\ Author.\ (1998,\ November\ 18).\ All-Airline\ Meeting.\ CNS/ATM\ Focused\ Team\ (C/AFT),\ 1-24.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.boeing.com/commercial/caft/reference/meetings/98_11_18/01_atspfg.pdf^

    ^c)\ Pepper,\ Joshua\ W.;\ Mills,\ Kristine\ R.;\ Wojcik,\ Leonard\ A.\ (2003,\ June\ 27).\ Predictability\ and\ Uncertainty\ in\ Air\ Traffic\ Flow\ Management.\ Center\ for\ Advanced\ Aviation\ System\ Development\ (CAASD),\ 1-10.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ <http://www.mitrecaasd.org/library/presentations/atm2003/atm2003_paper45.pdf>^

    ^d)\ this\ benefit\ has\ also\ been\ strongly\ substantiated\ in\ IBM's\ interviews\ with\ airline\ stakeholders.^

[^35]: ^No\ Author.\ (2003,\ September\ 11).\ FAA\ Flight\ Plan\ 2004-2008.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration,\ 31.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.faa.gov/apo/strategicplan/FAA_Flight_Plan.pdf^

[^36]: (25 Feb, 2004) IBM LAAS Benefits Analysis -- Preliminary
    Findings.

[^37]: ^No\ Author.\ (No\ Date\ Given).\ Section\ 6.\ Holding\ Aircraft.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.faa.gov/ATPUBS/ATC/Chp4/atc0406.html^

[^38]: ^Interview\ with\ a\ major\ carrier\ produced\ the\ estimate\ of\ 2\ minutes\ to\ taxi\ 1500\ ft^

[^39]: ^No\ Author.\ (No\ Date\ Given).\ Section\ 3.\ Wake\ Turbulence.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www2.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap7/aim0703.html^

[^40]: ^Odoni,\ Amedeo\ R.,\ Rousseau,\ Jean-Marc,\ and\ Wilson,\ Nigel\ (1994).\ Models\ in\ Urban\ and\ Air\ Transportation.\ Amsterdam:\ Elsevier\ Science\ Publishers.^

[^41]: ^See\ Appendix\ E\ for\ a\ description\ of\ how\ a\ "typical"\ day's\ traffic\ is\ estimated.^

[^42]: ^See\ Appendix\ C.^

[^43]: ^Estimated\ to\ be\ 30\ departures\ per\ hour,\ based\ on\ theoretical\ models\ and\ comparison\ to\ similar\ runways\ at\ other\ airports.^

[^44]: ^Discounted\ 20\ year\ benefit\ for\ the\ scenario\ in\ which\ all\ users\ equip\ with\ WAAS\ is\ \$2.5M\ for\ Airline\ Direct\ Operating\ Costs\ and\ \$2.8M\ for\ Passenger\ Value\ of\ Time.^

[^45]: ^Egan,\ Paul.\ (2001,\ February\ 27).\ New\ radar\ would\ speed\ airport\ traffic.\ The\ Detroit\ News.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.detnews.com/2001/metro/0102/27/d01-193153.htm^

[^46]: ^Houck,\ Sharon;\ Barrows,\ Andrew;\ Parkinson,\ Bradford;\ Enge,\ Per;\ Powell,\ J.\ David.\ (1999).\ Flight\ Testing\ WAAS\ for\ Use\ in\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Approaches.\ Department\ of\ Aeronautics\ and\ Astronautics,\ Stanford\ University,\ 1-12.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://waas.stanford.edu/\~wwu/papers/gps/PDF/sharonparallel.pdf^

[^47]: ^Houck,\ Sharon;\ Powell,\ J.\ David.\ (2001).\ Assessment\ of\ the\ Probability\ of\ a\ Midair\ Collision\ during\ an\ Ultra\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Approach.\ Department\ of\ Aeronautics\ and\ Astronautics,\ Stanford\ University,\ 1-11.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://waas.stanford.edu/\~wwu/sharon/briefs/gncpaper01.pdf^

[^48]: ^Houck,\ Sharon.\ (2001,\ April).\ Multi\ Aircraft\ Dynamics,\ Navigation\ and\ Operation.\ The\ Department\ of\ Aeronautics\ and\ Astronautics\ and\ the\ Committee\ on\ Graduate\ Studies\ of\ Stanford\ University,\ 1-141.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://waas.stanford.edu/\~wwu/sharon/briefs/sharonthesis01.pdf^

[^49]: ^Ashford,\ Rose.\ (1998,\ December\ 24).\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Approaches.\ NASA\ Ames\ Research\ Center.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.asc.nasa.gov/tap/cspa/cspa.html^

[^50]: ^Elliott\ Dawn\ M.\ and\ Perry\ R.\ Brad.\ (2000,\ August14-17).\ NASA\ Research\ for\ Instrument\ Approaches\ to\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Runways.\ NASA,\ 1-8.\ Retrieved\ June\ 2,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/ltrs/PDF/2000/aiaa/NASA-aiaa-2000-4358.pdf^

[^51]: ^Ashford,\ Rose.\ (2002,\ September\ 11).\ Closely-Spaced\ Parallel\ Approaches.\ NASA,\ 1-21.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/ihi/personnel/ashford/CSPA20D.pdf^

[^52]: ^Eurocontrol.\ (2003,\ May\ 2).\ GBAS\ Roadmap.\ EUROCONTROL,\ 1-6.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:^

    ^http://www.eurocontrol.fr/projects/sbas/Library/gwg7/GWG-7_IP1_GNSS.4WP.yy2_v1.0.pdf^

[^53]: ^Eurocontrol,\ "Benefit\ Estimation\ of\ GBAS\ for\ Simultaneous\ Independent\ Operations\ for\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Runways\ in\ ECAC"^

[^54]: ^Eurocontrol,\ Executive\ Summaries\ of\ ECAC\ Precision\ Approach\ and\ Landing\ Task\ Force\ (EPAL)\ Activities\ in\ Close\ Relation\ to\ GBAS,\ Joint\ EPAL/GWG\ meeting,\ February\ 3,\ 2004.^

[^55]: ^Shank,\ E.\ M.;\ Hollister,\ K.\ M.\ (1994).\ Precision\ Runway\ Monitor.\ Lincoln\ Laboratory\ Journal,^

    ^Vol.\ 7,\ No.\ 2.^

[^56]: ^Haines,\ Dr.\ A.\ L.;\ Swedish,\ W.\ J.\ (1981).\ Requirements\ for\ Independent\ and\ Dependent\ Parallel\ Instrument\ Approaches\ at\ Reduced\ Runway\ Spacing\ (Rep.\ No.\ MTR-81W15).\ Virginia:\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation.^

[^57]: ^Bone,\ R.;\ Olmos,\ O.;\ Mundra,\ A.\ (2001).\ Paired\ Approach:\ A\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Runway\ Approach\ Concept\ (Rep.\ No.\ MP-01W0000046).\ Virginia:\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation.^

[^58]: ^Higgins,\ M.\ K.\ (1994).\ Evidence\ for\ Parallel\ Approach\ Blunders\ in\ the\ National\ Airspace\ System\ Incident\ Monitoring\ System\ (NAIMS).\ (Rep.\ No.\ MP-94W000076).\ Virginia:\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation.^

[^59]: ^Monaco,\ Nadine.\ (2003,\ September).\ New\ Performance-based\ Navigation\ Standards\ Encourage\ Increased\ Flexibility\ and\ Safety\ in\ the\ Skies.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ June\ 2,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.mitre.org/news/digest/aviation/09_03/a_nrp.html^

[^60]: ^Mundra,\ Anand,\ D.,\ Cooper,\ Wayne\ W.,\ Levy,\ Benjamin\ S.,\ Lunsford,\ Clark\ R.,\ Smith,\ Arthur\ P.,\ Tittsworth,\ Jeffrey\ A.\ and\ Lang,\ Steven.\ (2003,\ June\ 23-27).\ A\ Phased\ Approach\ to\ Increase\ Airport\ Capacity\ Through\ Safe\ Reduction\ of\ Existing\ Wake\ Turbulence\ Constraints.\ The\ MITRE\ Corporation.\ Retrieved\ June\ 2,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://atm2003.eurocontrol.fr/slides/airport/6_85_Cooper.ppt^

[^61]: ^Houck,\ Sharon;\ Barrows,\ Andrew;\ Parkinson,\ Bradford;\ Enge,\ Per;\ Powell,\ J.\ David.\ (1999).\ Flight\ Testing\ WAAS\ for\ Use\ in\ Closely\ Spaced\ Parallel\ Approaches.\ Department\ of\ Aeronautics\ and\ Astronautics,\ Stanford\ University,\ 1-12.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://waas.stanford.edu/\~wwu/papers/gps/PDF/sharonparallel.pdf^

[^62]: ^Salvano,\ D.\ (2003,\ August\ 12).\ ADS-B\ within\ the\ Safe\ Flight\ 21\ Program.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ June\ 2,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.faa.gov/And/AND500/docmgr/docs/T0276.ppt^

[^63]: ^No\ Author.\ (No\ Date\ Given).\ 2002\ Aviation\ Capacity\ Enhancement\ Plan.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ June\ 2,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://www.faa.gov/ats/asc/02ACE.html^

[^64]: ^FAA\ (2001)\ Airport\ Capacity\ Benchmark\ Report\ 2001^

[^65]: ^For\ a\ description\ of\ this\ model,\ please\ see\ Appendix\ E.^

[^66]: ^See\ Appendix\ E\ for\ a\ description\ of\ how\ a\ representative\ traffic\ day\ was\ estimated^

[^67]: ^See\ Appendix\ I,\ assumptions\ 3\ and\ 4.^

[^68]: ^No\ Author.\ (2004,\ May\ 19).\ Section\ 4:\ Aircraft\ Operating\ Costs.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://apo.faa.gov/arcc/Chapters/031223%20Sec%204%20-%20Operating%20costs.doc^

[^69]: ^Treatment\ of\ Values\ of\ Passenger\ Time\ in\ Economic\ Analysis,\ U.S.\ Department\ of\ Transportation,\ FAA-APO-03-1,\ March\ 2003.^

[^70]: ^No\ Author.\ (2004,\ May\ 19).\ Section\ 3:\ Aircraft\ Capacity\ and\ Utilization\ Factors.\ Federal\ Aviation\ Administration.\ Retrieved\ May\ 19,\ 2004\ from\ the\ World\ Wide\ Web:\ http://apo.faa.gov/arcc/Chapters/031223%20Sec%203%20-%20Capacity%20and%20utilization.doc^

[^71]: ^see\ for\ example:\ Press,\ Flannery,\ Teukolsky,\ Vetterling,\ Numerical\ Recipes,\ Cambridge\ Univ.\ Press,\ 1986;\ or,\ <http://www.ualberta.ca/~cdeutsch/images/Lec04-MonteCarlo.pdf>.;\ or,\ Rubinstein,\ Simulation\ and\ the\ Monte\ Carlo\ Method,\ Wiley\ Interscience,\ 1981.^

[^72]: ^With\ replacement,\ the\ sampling\ may\ result\ in\ random\ numbers\ being\ selected\ more\ than\ once\ within\ the\ same\ trial.\ In\ other\ words,\ randomly\ selecting\ a\ particular\ quarter\ hour\ to\ add\ a\ flight\ to\ does\ not\ eliminate\ that\ quarter\ hour\ from\ being\ selected\ again.\ Thus,\ more\ than\ one\ flight\ may\ be\ added\ to\ any\ one\ quarter\ hour\ interval.\ See,\ for\ example:\ http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2002/0402/dept/d045802.htm.^

[^73]: ^Satellite\ Operational\ Implementation\ Team.\ (2002,\ August\ 5).\ LAAS\ Concept\ of\ Operations;\ "Each\ LAAS\ ground\ facility\ has\ a\ very\ high\ frequency\ data\ broadcast\ (VDB)\ coverage\ volume\ that\ extends\ from\ surface\ line\ of\ sight\ to\ 10,000ft\ above\ ground\ level\ (AGL)\ at\ a\ radial\ distance\ out\ to\ 23\ nm\ from\ the\ VDB\ antenna\ site."^

[^74]: ^National\ Flight\ Data\ Center,\ FAA\ ATA-110;\ http://www.faa.gov/ats/ata/ata100/110/index.html^