1 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

10 Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

U.S. Department of 

Transportation

Federal Aviation 

Administration

A Plan for the Future

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025
2 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

This 2016 report is the FAA’s eleventh annual update to the controller workforce plan. 

The FAA issued the first comprehensive controller workforce plan in December 2004. It 

provides staffing ranges for all of the FAA’s air traffic control facilities and actual onboard 

controllers as of September 19, 2015. 

Section (221) of Public Law (108-176) (updated by Public Law 111-117) requires the FAA Administrator to transmit 

a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the House of Representatives 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that describes the overall air traffic controller workforce plan. It is 

due by March 31 of each fiscal year, otherwise the FAA’s appropriation is reduced by $100,000 for each day it is late.
3 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

3 Table of Contents

4 Executive Summary

6 Chapter 1 | Introduction

6 Staffing to Traffic

9 Meeting the Challenge

10 Chapter 2 | Facilities and Services

12 Chapter 3 | Staffing Requirements

15 Staffing Ranges

19 Air Traffic Staffing Standards Overview

20 Tower Cab Overview

21 TRACON Overview

22 En Route Overview

22 Summary

23 Air Traffic Staffing Standards Review

24 Air Traffic Controller Scheduling

24 Specify Demand

26 Manage a Schedule/Day of Operation Views

26 OPAS Lite

27 Air Traffic Scheduling Software Review

28 Technological Advances

31 Chapter 4 | Losses

31 Controller Loss Summary

32 Actual Controller Retirements

33 Controller Workforce Age Distribution

34 Controller Retirement Eligibility

35 Controller Retirement Pattern

36 Controller Losses Due to Retirements

37 Controller Losses Due to Resignations, Removals 

and Deaths

37 Developmental Attrition

38 Academy Attrition

38 Controller Losses Due to Promotions and Other 

Transfers

39 Total Controller Losses

41 Chapter 5 | Hiring Plan

42 Controller Hiring Profile

43 Trainee-to-Total-Controller Percentage

46 Chapter 6 | Hiring Process

46 Controller Hiring Sources

46 Recruitment

47 Chapter 7 | Training

47 The Training Process

48 Designing and Delivering Effective Training

49 Infrastructure Investments

49 Time to Certification

50 Preparing for NextGen

51 Chapter 8 | Funding Status

52 Appendix | 2016 Facility Staffing Ranges

Table of Contents
4 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Executive Summary

Safety is the top priority of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as it manages America’s 

National Airspace System (NAS). The NAS is the common network of U.S. airspace — air 

navigation facilities, equipment, and services; airports or landing areas; aeronautical charts, 

information and services; rules, regulations, and procedures; technical information; and 

manpower and material. Thanks to the expertise of people and the support of technology, tens 

of thousands of aircraft are guided safely and expeditiously every day through the NAS to their 

destinations.

WORKLOAD

An important part of managing the NAS involves actively aligning controller resources with demand. The FAA “staffs 

to traffic,” matching the number of air traffic controllers at its facilities with traffic volume and workload. The FAA’s 

staffing needs are dynamic due to the dynamic nature of the workload and traffic volume.

TRAFFIC

Air traffic demand has declined significantly since 2000, the peak year for traffic. For the purposes of this plan, air 

traffic includes aircraft that are controlled, separated and managed by air traffic controllers. This includes commercial 

passenger and cargo aircraft as well as general aviation and military aircraft. Since 2000 traffic volume has declined 

by 23 percent and is not expected to return to those levels in the near term.

New on the horizon, however, is the introduction of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). These are different from 

manned aircraft and introducing them safely into the nation’s airspace is challenging for both the FAA and the 

aviation community. The FAA is taking an incremental approach to safe UAS integration; this is aided by the FAA’s 

new compliance philosophy designed to help identify and correct potential hazards before they result in an incident 

or accident. The extent of UAS’ impact on air traffic control will most certainly evolve.

HEADCOUNT

In many facilities, the current Actual on Board (AOB) number may exceed the facility’s target staffing ranges. This is 

because many facilities’ current AOB (all controllers at the facility) numbers include many developmental controllers 

in training to offset expected future attrition. While the FAA strives to keep Certified Professional Controllers (CPCs) 

and Certified Professional Controllers in Training (CPC-ITs) within the range, individual facilities can be above the 

range due to advance hiring. The FAA hires and staffs facilities so that trainees are fully prepared to take over 

responsibilities when senior controllers leave.

RETIREMENTS

Fiscal year 2015 retirements were slightly higher than projected, and almost equal to those in 2014. Annual 

retirements have increased since 2012 but are leveling off and still well below those experienced in 2007 when the 

long-anticipated wave of retirements peaked. Retirements are expected to continue to fall for the next decade. In the 

last five years, 3,213 controllers have retired. The FAA carefully tracks actual retirements and projects future losses to 

ensure its recruitment and training keep pace.
5 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

HIRING

In the last five years, the FAA has hired approximately 4,700 new air traffic controllers. We plan to hire more than 

7,400 new controllers over the next five years to keep pace with expected attrition and traffic growth. The FAA has 

faced a number of hiring challenges in recent years and hired 1,345 controllers in 2015 compared to the previously 

reported plan of 1,772. We have renewed our focus on hiring efforts for FY 2016 – FY 2018 to restore the trainee 

pipeline.

TRAINING

As the FAA brings these new employees on board, training continues to be closely monitored at all facilities. We 

must carefully manage the process to ensure that our trainees are hired in the places we need them and progress in 

a timely manner to become certified professional controllers (CPC). The FAA will also continue to take action at the 

facility level should adjustments become necessary due to changes in traffic volume, retirements or other attrition.

In addition, the FAA has updated its training courses to support cumulative grading. This allows for student 

assessments at multiple points in training and allows for new training advancement decision points.

Ongoing hiring and training initiatives, as well as increased simulator use, are helping the FAA meet its goals. While 

the FAA is managing today’s air traffic, we must also integrate new technologies into air traffic operations. From 

state-of-the-art simulators to satellite technology, air traffic is evolving into a more automated system. The FAA is 

working diligently to ensure well-trained controllers continue to uphold the highest safety standards as we plan for 

the future.

 The FAA’s goal is to ensure that the agency has the flexibility to match the number of 

controllers at each facility with traffic volume and workload. Staffing to traffic is just one 

of the ways we manage America’s National Airspace System.
6 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 1 | Introduction

Staffing to Traffic

Air traffic controller workload and traffic volume are dynamic, and so are the FAA’s staffing needs. A primary 

factor affecting controller workload is the demand created by air traffic, encompassing both commercial and noncommercial activity. Commercial activity includes air carrier and commuter/air taxi traffic. Non-commercial activity 

includes general aviation and military traffic.

Since the early 1990s, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have operated on a limited basis in the National Airspace 

System (NAS) and mainly supported public operations, such as military and border security operations. In recent 

years, UAS and operations have significantly increased in number, technical complexity, and application. The list 

of uses has rapidly expanded to encompass a broad range of activities, including aerial photography, surveying, 

communications and broadcast, as well as hobby and recreation. In December 2015, the FAA began registration 

of all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). As policy and technology updates allow widespread use of UAS for 

commercial applications, impact on Air Traffic Control workload will be incorporated into our models and forecasts. 

Oversight of UAS is aided by FAA’s new compliance philosophy which is designed to help identify and correct 

potential hazards before they result in an incident or accident.

Adequate numbers of controllers must be available to cover the peaks in traffic caused by weather and daily, weekly 

or seasonal variations, so we continue to “staff to traffic.” This practice gives us the flexibility throughout each day to 

match the number of controllers at each facility with traffic volume and workload.

System-wide, air traffic has declined by 23 percent since peak year 2000. The chart in Figure 1.1 shows that air 

traffic volume is not expected to return to peak levels in the near term.

FIGURE 1.1 TRAFFIC FORECAST
7 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Figure 1.2 shows system-wide controller staffing and traffic, indexed from 2000 and projected through 2025. 

Indexing is a widely used technique which compares the change over time of two or more data series (in this case, 

total controller headcount, certified profession controllers (CPC) and certified professional controllers in training 

(CPC-IT) and traffic). The data series are set equal to each other (or indexed) at a particular point in time (in this case, 

the year 2000, a high mark for traffic) and measured relative to that index point in each successive year. This way we 

know how much growth or decline has occurred compared to the base value.

Staffing to traffic not only applies on a daily basis, but also means that we staff to satisfy expected needs two to 

three years in advance. We do this to ensure sufficient training time for new hires. Despite the decline in air traffic 

shown in Figure 1.2, “staffing to traffic” requires us to anticipate controller attrition, so that we plan and hire new 

controllers in advance of need. This is one reason that staffing remains well ahead of traffic. The gap between the 

green line (Headcount) and the orange line (CPC and CPC-IT staffing) is the advance hire trainee pipeline and is 

projected to close significantly by 2022. The headcount and CPC+CPCIT lines converge due to reduced retirements 

and other losses.

FIGURE 1.2 SYSTEM-WIDE TRAFFIC AND TOTAL CONTROLLER TRENDS
8 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce
9 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Meeting the Challenge

The FAA’s hiring plan is designed to phase in new hires as needed over time. This will avoid creating another major 

spike in retirement eligibility in future years like the one resulting from the 1981 controller strike. Annual retirements 

are leveling off and still well below those experienced in 2007 when the long-anticipated wave of retirements peaked. 

Retirements are expected to continue to fall for the next decade.

The FAA hires to address all attrition, not just retirements. 

We revised the hiring plan to increase FY 2016 through FY 2018 hiring to near-capacity levels so that we can catch 

up from a variety of challenges. They include: a nearly year-long hiring freeze resulting from sequestration in 2013 

and effects from an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) security breach, which shut down the automated ability 

to process clearances to applicants for approximately one month. The combined impact of these issues disrupted 

the hiring pipeline and set us back in our staffing plans.

Hiring, however, is just one part of the challenge. Other challenges involve controller placement, controller training 

and controller scheduling. It is important that newly hired and transferring controllers are properly placed in the 

facilities where we will need them. Once they are placed, they need to be effectively and efficiently trained, and 

assigned to efficient work schedules.

To address these challenges, the FAA has:

• Implemented changes to its air traffic control hiring process. In December 2015, the FAA launched an 

extended announcement to attract applicants with previous experience and we are working to revamp the 

Air Traffic Selection and Training (AT-SAT) Battery that will enhance our screening tools for future all sources 

announcements.

• Revamped its placement process for Air Traffic Controller trainees allowing increased flexibility for the agency 

and improved efficiency in both hiring and initial training of air traffic controllers.

• Introduced a new collaborative and centralized process to balance the controller ranks by revamping the 

employee requests for reassignments, matching employee requests with the agency’s needs and establishing 

a national release policy aimed at expediting requests into facilities with the greatest staffing needs.

Effective and efficient training, as well as properly placing new and transferring controllers, are two important factors 

in the agency’s success.

Systematically replacing air traffic controllers where we need them, as well as ensuring the 

knowledge transfer required to maintain a safe NAS, is the focus of this plan.
10 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 2 | Facilities and Services

America’s National Airspace System (NAS) is a network of people, procedures and equipment. Pilots, controllers, 

technicians, engineers, inspectors and supervisors work together to make sure millions of passengers move through 

the airspace safely every day.

More than 14,000 federal air traffic controllers in airport traffic control towers, terminal radar approach control 

facilities and air route traffic control centers guide pilots through the system. An additional 1,292 civilian contract 

controllers and more than 10,000 military controllers also provide air traffic services for the NAS.

These controllers provide air navigation services to aircraft in domestic airspace, in addition to 24.6 million square 

miles of international oceanic airspace delegated to the United States by the International Civil Aviation Organization.

TERMINAL AND EN ROUTE AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

Controller teams in airport towers and radar approach control facilities watch over all aircraft traveling through the 

Terminal airspace. Their main responsibility is to organize the flow of aircraft into and out of an airport. Relying on 

visual observation and radar, they closely monitor each aircraft to ensure a safe distance between all aircraft and 

to guide pilots during takeoff and landing. In addition, controllers keep pilots informed about changes in weather 

conditions.

Once airborne, the aircraft quickly departs the Terminal airspace surrounding the airport. At this point, controllers in 

the radar approach control notify En Route controllers, who take charge in the vast airspace between airports. There 

are 21 air route traffic control centers around the country. Each En Route center is assigned a block of airspace 

containing many defined routes. Aircraft fly along these designated routes to reach their destination.

En Route controllers use surveillance methods to maintain a safe distance between aircraft. En Route controllers also 

provide weather advisory and traffic information to aircraft under their control. As an aircraft nears its destination, En 

Route controllers transition it to the Terminal environment, where Terminal controllers guide it to a safe landing.

FAA AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES

As of October 1, 2015, the FAA operated 316 air traffic control facilities. Table 2.1 lists the type and number of these 

FAA facilities. More than one type of facility may be collocated in the same building.

Each type of FAA facility has several classification levels based on numerous factors, including traffic volume, 

complexity and sustainability of traffic. To account for changes in traffic and the effect of investments that reduce 

complexity, as well as to compensate controllers that work the highest and most complex volume of traffic, facilities 

are monitored for downward and upward trends.
11 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

TYPE NAME NUMBER 

OF FACILITIES DESCRIPTION

1 Tower 

without Radar 1

An airport traffic control terminal that provides service using direct observation 

primarily to aircraft operating under visual flight rules (VFR). This terminal 

is located at airports where the principal user category is low-performance 

aircraft.

2

Terminal Radar 

Approach Control 

(TRACON)

24

An air traffic control terminal that provides radar-control service to aircraft 

arriving or departing the primary airport and adjacent airports, and to aircraft 

transiting the terminal’s airspace.

3

Combination 

Radar Approach 

Control and 

Tower with Radar 

130

An air traffic control terminal that provides radar-control service to aircraft 

arriving or departing the primary airport and adjacent airports, and to aircraft 

transiting the terminal’s airspace. This terminal is divided into two functional 

areas: radar approach control positions and tower positions. These two areas 

are located within the same facility, or in close proximity to one another, and 

controllers rotate between both areas.

4

Combination 

Non-Radar 

Approach Control 

and Tower 

without Radar

2

An air traffic control terminal that provides air traffic control services for the 

airport at which the tower is located and without the use of radar, approach and 

departure control services to aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) to and from one or more adjacent airports.

6 Combined 

Control Facility 4

An air traffic control facility that provides approach control services for one 

or more airports as well as en route air traffic control (center control) for a 

large area of airspace. Some may provide tower services along with approach 

control and en route services. Also includes Combined Center Radar Approach 

(CERAP) facilities. 

7 Tower with Radar 130

An airport traffic control terminal that provides traffic advisories, spacing, 

sequencing and separation services to VFR and IFR aircraft operating in the 

vicinity of the airport, using a combination of radar and direct observations.

8

Air Route Traffic 

Control Center 

(ARTCC)

21

An air traffic control facility that provides air traffic control service to aircraft 

operating on IFR flight plans within controlled airspace and principally during 

the en route phase of flight. When equipment capabilities and controller 

workload permit, certain advisory/assistance services may be provided to VFR 

aircraft.

9 Combined 

TRACON Facility 3

An air traffic control terminal that provides radar approach control services 

for two or more large hub airports, as well as other satellite airports, where 

no single airport accounts for more than 60 percent of the total Combined 

TRACON facility’s air traffic count. This terminal requires such a large number 

of radar control positions that it precludes the rotation of controllers through all 

positions.

-

Air Traffic 

Control System 

Command Center

1

The Air Traffic Control System Command Center is responsible for the strategic 

aspects of the NAS. The Command Center modifies traffic flow and rates when 

congestion, weather, equipment outages, runway closures or other operational 

conditions affect the NAS.

TOTAL 316

TABLE 2.1 TYPES AND NUMBER OF FAA AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES
12 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 3 | Staffing Requirements

The FAA issued the first comprehensive controller workforce plan in December 2004. “A Plan for the Future: 10-

Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce” detailed the resources needed to keep the controller workforce 

sufficiently staffed. This report is updated each year to reflect changes in traffic forecasts, retirements and other 

factors.

“Staffing to traffic” requires the FAA to consider many facility-specific factors. They include traffic volumes based 

on FAA forecasts and hours of operation, as well as individualized forecasts of controller retirements and other 

non-retirement losses. In addition, staffing at each location can be affected by unique facility requirements such as 

temporary airport runway construction, seasonal activity and the number of controllers currently in training. Staffing 

numbers will vary as the requirements of the location dictate.

Proper staffing levels also depend on the efficient scheduling of employees, so the FAA tracks a number of indicators 

as part of its continuous staffing review. Some of these indicators are overtime, time on position, leave usage and the 

number of trainees. Time on position is defined as the amount of cumulative time controllers spend while “plugged 

in” to their position controlling live traffic. When not on position, controllers are on periodic breaks, in training, or 

performing other assigned duties.

In FY 2015, the system average for overtime was 2.6 percent, a slight increase from the FY 2014 level. Meanwhile, 

cumulative average time on position per 8 hour shift was 4 hours and 6 minutes, a four-minute reduction from FY 2014.
13 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Figure 3.1 shows the expected end-of-year total headcount (blue line), CPC & CPC-IT headcount (orange line), new 

hires and losses (small bars) by year through FY 2025.

Figures for FY 2015 represent actual end-of-year headcount, losses and hires. Losses include retirements, 

promotions and transfers, resignations, removals, deaths, developmental attrition and academy attrition. Due to 

several challenges, the FAA ended ended FY 2015 more than 500 controllers below the FY 2015 headcount plan.

In general, the FAA strives to keep the number of CPCs and CPC-ITs near the middle of the calculated staffing 

range. Figure 3.1 shows that FY 2016 staffing values are within the calculated staffing range shown by the 

“min” and “max” bars. However, a facility’s total staffing levels are often above the defined staffing range because 

new controllers are typically hired two to three years in advance of expected attrition to allow for sufficient training 

time. The total expected end-of-year staffing number shown in Figure 3.1 reflects this projected advanced hiring.

The FAA hires and staffs facilities so that trainees are fully prepared to take over 

responsibilities when senior controllers retire.

FIGURE 3.1 PROJECTED CONTROLLER TRENDS
14 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce
15 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Staffing Ranges

Each of the FAA’s 316 facilities typically staffs open positions with a combination of certified controllers who are 

proficient, or checked out, in specific sectors or positions. Because traffic and other factors are dynamic at these 

facilities, the FAA produces facility-level controller staffing ranges. These ranges are calculated to ensure that there 

are enough controllers to cover operating positions every day of the year.

Ensuring that we have enough controllers is not only important on a daily basis, but also means that we staff to 

satisfy expected needs two to three years in advance. We do this to ensure sufficient training time for new hires. The 

uptick caused by hiring two to three years ahead of time is one reason that staffing remains well ahead of traffic.

The FAA uses four data sources to calculate staffing ranges. Three are data driven; the other is based on field 

judgment. They are:

1. Staffing standards – output of mathematical models used to relate controller workload to air traffic activity.

2. Service unit input – the number of controllers required to staff the facility, typically based on past position 

utilization and other unique facility operational requirements. The service unit input is provided by field 

management.

3. Past productivity – the headcount required to match the historical best productivity for the facility. Productivity 

is defined as operations per controller. Facility productivity is calculated using operations and controller data 

from the 10 year period of 2006 to 2015. If any annual point falls outside +/- 5 percent of the 2006 to 2015 

average, it is eliminated from the analysis. From the remaining data points, the highest productivity year is 

then used.

4. Peer productivity – the headcount required to match peer group productivity. Like facilities are grouped by 

type, level and part-time or full-time status, and their corresponding productivity is calculated. If the facility 

being considered is consistently above or below the peer group, the peer group figure is not used in the 

overall average and analysis.

The average of this data is calculated, multiplied by +/- 10 percent and then rounded to determine the high and low 

points in the staffing range.

Exceptional situations or outliers are removed from the averages (for example, if a change in the type or level of a 

facility occurred over the period of evaluation). By analyzing the remaining data points, staffing ranges are generated 

for each facility.
16 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The 2016 staffing ranges for controllers are published by facility in the Appendix of this report. In general, the FAA 

strives to keep the number of CPCs and CPC-ITs near the middle of the range. In many facilities, the current Actual 

on Board (AOB) number may appropriately exceed the range. This is because many facilities’ current AOB (all 

controllers at the facility) numbers include larger numbers of developmental controllers in training to offset expected 

future attrition. Individual facilities can be above the range due to advance hiring. Facilities may also be above the 

range based upon facility-specific training and attrition forecasts.

In the longer term, the number of new hires and total controllers will decline. This is because the surge of 

developmental controllers that were hired to replace the long-expected retirement wave over the past decade will 

have become CPCs. In the future, the vast majority of the controllers will be CPCs and CPC-ITs, and more facilities 

will routinely fall within the ranges.

Facility X Staffing

Controller Staffing

Characteristics/Drivers of High Staffing Levels

Inefficient scheduling

Fewer losses than projected

Less overtime

Reduction in traffic volumes

Decrease in hours of operation

Temporary airport construction

Higher number of position-qualified controllers

Higher number of advance hire trainees

Characteristics/Drivers of Low Staffing Levels

Reduced controller lost time

Greater use of overtime

Increase in traffic volumes

Increase in hours of operation

Temporary airport construction

Lower number of position-qualified controllers

Lower number of advance hire trainees

HIGH

LOW

FIGURE 3.2 CONTROLLER STAFFING
17 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Figure 3.3 depicts an example of a large, Type 3 FAA facility. This Combination Radar Approach Control and Tower 

with Radar facility is one in which controllers work in the tower cab portion and in the radar room (also known as a 

TRACON). To be a CPC in these types of facilities, controllers must be checked out on all positions in both the tower 

and the TRACON.

Trainees are awarded “D1” status (and the corresponding increase in pay) after being checked out on several 

positions. The levels of responsibility (and pay) gradually increase as the trainees progress through training. 

Once developmental controllers are checked out at the D1 level, they can work several positions in the tower 

independently and without training supervision (Clearance Delivery, Ground Control and Local Control). Once 

checked out on the Runway Crossing Coordinator position, developmental controllers would be tower certified and 

able to work any position in the tower cab independently and without training supervision. They would still not be 

a “D2” however, as there are also several positions in the TRACON to be checked out on (Arrival Data, Departure 

Data, Final Vector 1 and Final Vector 2). A controller in Figure 3.3 must be certified on all positions in the tower and 

TRACON to become a CPC.

CPC

TRACON

Radar Position 5

D3 Radar Position 4

Radar Position 3 Radar Position 3

Radar Position 2 Radar Position 2

D2 Radar Position 1 Radar Position 1

Final Vector 2 Final Vector 2 Final Vector 2

Final Vector 1 Final Vector 1 Final Vector 1

Departure Data Departure Data Departure Data

Arrival Data Arrival Data Arrival Data

D1 Runway Crossing 

Coordinator

Runway Crossing 

Coordinator

Runway Crossing 

Coordinator

TOWER

Local Control Local Control Local Control Local Control

Ground Control Ground Control Ground Control Ground Control

Clearance Delivery Clearance Delivery Clearance Delivery Clearance Delivery

Training Progression to Certified Professional Controller

FIGURE 3.3 CONTROLLER TRAINING PROGRESSION
18 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The levels of responsibility continue to increase as one progresses toward CPC status, but trainees can and do 

control traffic much earlier in the training process. Historically, the FAA has used these position-qualified controllers 

to staff operations and free up CPCs for more complex positions as well as to conduct training.

Having the majority of the workforce certified as CPCs makes the job of scheduling much easier at the facility. CPCs 

can cover all positions in their assigned area, whereas position-qualified developmentals require the manager to 

track who is qualified to work which positions independently. This task becomes much easier with a scheduling tool.

Trainees include both developmental controllers and certified professional controllers in training 

(CPC-IT). A CPC-IT is a controller who moves to another area within a facility or to a new facility and must 

be trained to the qualifications of that new environment. CPC-ITs are different from developmentals in 

that developmentals have never been fully checked out and certified as a CPC anywhere.
19 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Air Traffic Staffing Standards Overview

The FAA has used air traffic staffing standards to help determine controller staffing levels since the 1970s.

FAA facilities are currently identified and managed as either Terminal facilities where airport traffic control services 

are provided, including the immediate airspace around an airport, or En Route facilities where high-altitude 

separation services are provided using computer systems and surveillance technologies. Terminal facilities are 

further designated as tower cabs or TRACONs. These Terminal facilities may be collocated in the same building, 

but because of differences in workload, their staffing requirements are modeled separately. Figure 3.4 provides an 

overview of FAA facilities and air traffic control positions.

Airport Traffic 

Control Tower 

(ATCT)

Airport Surface Terminal Departure En Route/Oceanic Terminal Arrival Airport Surface

Airport Traffic 

Control Tower 

(ATCT)

Ground Controller

Issues approval for 

push back from 

gate and issues taxi 

instructions and 

clearances.

Local Controller

Issues takeoff 

clearances, 

maintains 

prescribed 

separation between 

departure aircraft, 

provides departure 

aircraft with latest 

weather/field 

conditions.

Clearance Delivery

Issues IFR and VFR 

flight plan clearances.

Flight Data

Receives and relays 

weather information 

and Notice to 

Airmen.

Departure Controller

Assigns headings 

and altitudes to 

departure aircraft. 

Hands off aircraft to 

the En Route Radar 

Controller.

Flight Data - Radar

Issues IFR flight plan 

clearances to aircraft 

at satellite airports, 

coordinates releases 

of satellite departures.

Radar Controller

Ensures the safe 

separation and 

orderly flow of 

aircraft through En 

Route center 

airspace (includes 

oceanic airspace).

Radar Associate

Assists the Radar 

Controller.

Radar Associate 

(Flight Data)

Supports the 

Center Radar 

Controller by 

handling flight 

data.

Arrival Controller

Assigns headings 

and altitudes to 

arrival aircraft to 

establish aircraft on 

final approach 

course.

Local Controller

Issues landing 

clearances, 

maintains 

prescribed 

separation between 

arrivals, provides 

arrival aircraft with 

latest weather/field 

conditions.

Ground Controller

Issues taxi 

instructions and 

clearances to guide 

aircraft to the gate.

Terminal Radar 

Approach Control 

(TRACON)

Air Route Traffic 

Control Center 

(ARTCC)

Terminal Radar 

Approach Control 

(TRACON)

Push back, taxi and takeoff Ascent Cruise Cruise

Descent and approach Landing and taxi to gate

FIGURE 3.4 AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL POSITION AND FACILITY OVERVIEW
20 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The dynamic nature of air traffic controller workload coupled with traffic volume and facility staffing needs are all 

taken into account during the development of FAA staffing models and standards.

All FAA staffing models incorporate similar elements:

• Controller activity data is collected and processed quarterly, commensurate with the type of work being 

performed in the facilities.

• Models are developed that relate controller workload to air traffic activity. These requirements are entered into 

a scheduling algorithm.

• The modeled workload/traffic activity relationship is forecast for the 90th percentile (or 37th busiest) day for 

future years for each facility. Staffing based on the demands for the 90th percentile day assures that there are 

adequate numbers of controllers to meet traffic demands throughout the year.

• Allowances are applied for off-position activities such as vacation, training and additional supporting activities 

that must be accomplished off the control floor.

All staffing models go through similar development processes. Some components of the model-development phase 

vary as a function of the work being performed by the controllers. For example, a crew-based approach was used 

to model tower staffing requirements because the number and type of positions in a tower cab vary considerably as 

traffic changes, compared to those of a single sector in a TRACON or En Route center. All staffing models reflect the 

dynamic nature of staffing and traffic. Controller staffing requirements can vary throughout the day and throughout 

the year.

Tower Cab Overview

Air traffic controllers working in tower cabs manage traffic within a radius of a few miles of the airport. They instruct 

pilots during taxiing, takeoff and landing, and they grant clearance for aircraft to fly. Tower controllers ensure that 

aircraft maintain minimum separation distances between landing and departing aircraft, transfer control of aircraft to 

TRACON controllers when the aircraft leave their airspace, and receive control of aircraft for flights coming into their 

airspace.

• There are a variety of positions in the tower cab, such as Local Control, Ground Control, Flight Data, 

Coordinator, etc. Depending on the airport layout and/or size of the tower cabs (some airports have more than 

one tower), there can be more than one of the same types of position on duty.

• As traffic, workload and complexity increase, more or different positions are opened; as traffic, workload and 

complexity decrease, positions are closed or combined with other positions. In practice, minimum staffing 

levels may be determined by hours of operation and work rules.

Important factors that surfaced during the tower staffing model development included the availability, accessibility 

and increased reliability of traffic data and controller on-position reporting systems. The FAA is now able to analyze 

much larger quantities of tower data at a level of granularity previously unattainable. Staffing data and traffic volumes 

are collected for every facility.

The revised tower cab staffing models were developed using regression analysis as the primary method for modeling 

the relationship between staffing and workload drivers. The models relate observed, on-position controllers to the 

type and amount of traffic they actually handle. Regression analysis allows us to relate modeled controller staffing 

requirements with traffic activity and then use this relationship to predict future staffing requirements (standards) 

based on traffic projections.
21 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

TRACON Overview

Air traffic controllers working in TRACONs typically manage traffic within a 40-mile radius of the primary airport; 

however, this radius varies by facility. They instruct departing and arriving flights, and they grant clearance for 

aircraft to fly through the TRACON’s airspace. TRACON controllers ensure that aircraft maintain minimum separation 

distances between landing and departing aircraft, transfer control of aircraft to tower or En Route center controllers 

when the aircraft leave their airspace, and receive control of aircraft for flights coming into their airspace.

• TRACON airspace is divided into sectors that often provide services to multiple airports. Consolidated or large 

TRACONs in major metropolitan areas provide service to several primary airports. Their airspace is divided 

into areas of specialization, each of which contains groups of sectors.

• Controllers are assigned to various positions such as Radar, Final Vector, Departure Data, etc., to work 

traffic within each sector. These positions may be combined or de-combined based on changes in air traffic 

operations.

• As traffic, workload and complexity increase, the sectors may be subdivided (de-combined) and additional 

positions opened, or the sector sizes can be maintained with an additional controller assigned to an assistant 

position within the same sector.

• Similarly, when traffic, workload and complexity decline, the additional positions can be closed or the sectors 

recombined. In practice, minimum staffing levels may be determined by hours of operation and work rules.

Like the tower analysis, the FAA is able to analyze much larger quantities of TRACON data at a level of granularity 

previously unattainable. Important factors surfaced during the TRACON staffing model review including the 

availability, accessibility and increased reliability of traffic data and controller on-position reporting systems. Staffing 

data and traffic volumes were collected for every facility.

The TRACON staffing models were updated in early 2009. These revised TRACON models were developed using 

regression analysis as the primary method for modeling the relationship between staffing and workload drivers. The 

models relate observed, on-position controllers to the type and amount of traffic they actually handled. Regression 

allows us to relate modeled controller staffing requirements with traffic activity and then use this relationship to 

predict future staffing requirements (standards) based on traffic projections.
22 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

En Route Overview

Air traffic controllers assigned to En Route centers guide aircrafts flying outside of Terminal airspace. They also 

provide approach control services to small airports around the country where no Terminal service is provided. As 

aircraft fly across the country, pilots talk to controllers in successive En Route centers.

• En Route center airspace is divided into smaller, more manageable blocks of airspace called areas and 

sectors.

• Areas are distinct, and rarely change based on changes in traffic. Within those areas, sectors may be 

combined or de-combined based on changes in air traffic operations.

• Controllers are assigned to positions within the sectors (e.g., Radar, Radar Associate, Tracker). As traffic 

increases, sectors can be de-combined and additional positions opened, or the sector sizes can be 

maintained but additional controllers added to assistant positions within the sectors.

• Similarly, when traffic declines, the additional positions can be closed or the sectors recombined. In practice, 

minimum staffing levels may be determined by hours of operation and work rules.

The FAA’s Federally Funded Research and Development Center, operated by the MITRE Corporation, developed a 

model to generate data needed for the FAA’s staffing models. Like the tower and TRACON standards models, this 

approach incorporated actual traffic and more facility-specific data.

MITRE’s modeling approach reflects the dynamic nature of the traffic characteristics in a sector. It estimates the 

number of controllers, in teams of one to three people, necessary to work the traffic for that sector in 15-minute 

intervals. Differences in traffic characteristics in a sector could require different numbers of controllers to handle 

the same volume of traffic. For example, at one time most traffic might be cruising through a sector toward another 

location requiring minimal controller intervention. At another time, traffic might be climbing and descending through 

the same sector, a more complex scenario requiring more controllers. The same modeling techniques were applied 

uniformly to all sectors, providing results based on a common methodology across the country.

During fiscal years 2013 and 2014, MITRE collaborated with the FAA and the National Air Traffic Controllers 

Association (NATCA) to conduct an evaluation of the En Route on position staffing model at the request of the 

National Academy of Sciences to validate its core assumptions and parameters via empirical data collection. The 

evaluation, completed in the field and in a controlled laboratory setting, established values for model parameters, 

identified additional controller tasks for coverage by the model, and informed other enhancements to the model. In 

FY 2015, these updates were made and the on position staffing model was recalibrated. The evaluation results were 

shared with the FAA, NATCA and the National Academy of Sciences. The next step is to incorporate them into the on 

position staffing model for future staffing standards calculations.

Summary

The FAA’s staffing models incorporate output provided by the Tower, TRACON and En Route workload models which 

is run through a shift scheduling algorithm. Next, factors are applied to cover vacation time, break time, training, etc. 

Lastly, traffic growth forecasts are applied to provide the annual staffing standards that are incorporated into the 

staffing ranges presented in this plan for each facility.
23 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Air Traffic Staffing Standards Review

For more than 50 years, the FAA has developed and applied staffing standard models to help establish staffing 

requirements for its air traffic control (ATC) facilities. Over this period, independent groups, including the 

Transportation Research Board (TRB), have scrutinized the data sources and methods used by the FAA. A 1997 

report, for example, recommended an approach that combines formal modeled predictions with less formal methods 

based on expert judgment concerning staffing requirements at individual facilities (TRB 1997). That report noted 

that controller workforce planning is not a one-size-fits-all problem and observed that national planning needs to 

recognize features specific to individual ATC facilities. A more recent report reviewed the task load “complexity 

model” used in generating staffing standards for En Route facilities and offered advice on “ways to improve the 

modeling process going forward” (TRB 2010, 6).

In July 2014, the National Academy of Sciences completed its latest review of FAA staffing standards. The study 

committee consisted of academicians, consultants and a current NATCA controller as well as retired air traffic 

controllers. Overall, the committee found FAA’s staffing standards for terminal ATC facilities to be reasonable for use 

in developing initial estimates of the number of controllers needed for managing traffic at each facility. However, it 

had concerns about the validity of the mathematical model used for En Route facilities and the resulting estimates of 

controller staffing needs. They also “felt the steps taken by FAA to create a controller staffing plan from the staffing 

standards and then execute such plan were obscure. As a result, the committee was unable to determine the extent 

to which FAA staffing imbalances are being corrected over time to help ensure cost-effective staffing.”

In 2015, the FAA met with the National Academy of Sciences and NATCA to collaborate on controller staffing model 

review and validation. These meetings also provided an opportunity to review the July 2014 NAS report findings 

and recommendations, and to develop a path forward. The FAA is currently using this collaborative path forward 

by continuing to consult with the National Academy and NATCA regarding controller staffing models, scheduling 

practices, and the execution of hiring plans.
24 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Air Traffic Controller Scheduling

Optimizing controller schedules is a critical aspect of efficient workforce planning, since inefficient facility schedules 

can lead to excess staffing and/or increased overtime. Currently, the FAA’s air traffic facilities do not have access to 

a standardized, automated tool to assist them in developing optimal schedules and analyzing long-term workforce 

planning requirements. FAA facilities currently use a variety of non-standard methods that do not fully incorporate the 

complex resource management requirements that exist in today’s environment.

To address this need, the FAA has procured a widely used, commercially available “off-the-shelf” system that has 

been configured to FAA-specific requirements (e.g. national labor contract terms, FAA policy). The FAA’s Operational 

Planning and Scheduling (OPAS) tool can provide a common toolset for FAA facilities to effectively develop and 

maintain optimal schedules based on traffic, staffing, work rules and employee qualifications. Similar systems are 

being used by air navigation service providers worldwide and are commonplace in best-practice companies. 

More specifically, the FAA envisions the system can be used to create and analyze optimized schedules over variable 

time frames, with viewing capability in days, weeks, months, seasons and years. The system is able to:

• Generate optimal schedules for a given period (day, pay period, month and year) based on demand, business 

rule constraints, employee qualification requirements and available resources.

• Calculate optimal shift start times and associated demand in support of national and local bargaining.

• Propose various shifts in the most efficient way to cover demand while abiding by business and contractual 

rules.

• Calculate projected time on position (signed on and controlling traffic) to staff an area by shift, schedule 

segment and/or person.

• Run what-if analyses.

• Aid in the assignment of efficiently scheduled overtime.

• Automate shift requests, bid process and other scheduling-related tasks.

The major functionalities in the OPAS application are split into long-term (typically annually), mid-term (generating 

schedules), and short-term (day of operations). A typical workflow is shown below:

Specify Demand

OPAS determines the minimum number of controllers required to manage traffic based on an inputted demand 

curve. The demand curve gives the raw staffing required per 15-minute interval in a series of one-week periods. The 

number of different curves used can vary from one to 52 one-week curves. For example, one demand curve may 

describe the period from January to February and another the period from February to May, etc. If the summer is a 

particularly busy time, two separate demand curves can be used (one for the summer and one for the winter). The 

number of demand curves used in the field is determined after a statistical analysis and consultation with the facility.

Long Term Mid Term Short Term

Bidding Specify

Demand

Generate Shift 

Start Lines

Create

Shift Lines

Schedule

Generation

Day of

Operation
25 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

OPAS uses a mathematical algorithm to minimize the number of controllers needed to satisfy these demand periods. 

The first optimizer defines the shift start times and the demand associated with each shift on a daily basis. This 

minimum demand number helps the facility determine whether it is possible to approve leave, or whether someone 

needs to be moved from an evening shift to a day shift to adequately cover the traffic demand.

The previous diagram shows how OPAS uses the 15-minute demand (green blocks) to create the required shifts in 

the lower part of the diagram. 

OPAS allows for a different demand curve for different roles (e.g., controller versus supervisor), thus allowing for 

optimal schedules to be made for all positions in a facility. The blue line above the green blocks shows how the 

staffing per shift generated by OPAS more than adequately covers the inputted green demand curve.

In the above diagram, the left pane gives the category, names, and start and end times for the optimal shifts. There 

are three core shifts (for the day shift, evening shift and midnight shift) and three ancillary shifts per shift category. 

The last two panes give the demand per shift per day. In this example, since “Sunday” is selected, the last pane 

gives the minimum demand per shift on Sunday.
26 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Manage a Schedule/Day of Operation Views

Other views drill down to show the details of a single day. They allow the user to get a quick overview of what 

is happening on a given day, including leave, overtime, briefing periods and other duties (like training or special 

assignments). These views are updated in real time for all viewers as employees enter requests, and changes are 

made to the schedule.

The views can also address questions such as: 

• “Who is scheduled to work today and when?” 

• “Who is scheduled to work overtime?” 

• “Who has a leave request for today, pending or approved?” 

OPAS Lite

OPAS Lite is a mobile Web application developed to provide access to many of the major functions within OPAS. It is 

accessible on modern browsers and devices such as smartphones and tablets. OPAS Lite allows users to view and 

interact with their schedule anywhere, anytime. Functionality in OPAS Lite also includes a desktop kiosk (view-only 

mode), quick changing of kiosk users, viewing schedules, submitting requests and proxy requests, and viewing and 

acting on requests.
27 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Air Traffic Scheduling Software Review

The National Academy of Sciences listed in its 2014 report the following potential benefits of sophisticated 

scheduling software. The software:

• Provides a consistent basis for establishing work schedules that minimize or mitigate the safety risks 

associated with controller fatigue.

• Ensures that diverse facilities are all capable of generating efficient schedules, particularly at larger facilities 

where economies of scale may be possible.

• Provides a consistent basis for informing the development of staffing standards at FAA headquarters and the 

creation of work schedules at the facility level. 

The report further stated, “Schedule changes significantly affect the controller workforce. FAA should, as a matter 

of priority, continue its efforts to develop an improved scheduling tool capable of creating efficient controller work 

schedules that incorporate fatigue mitigation strategies. The agency should collaborate closely with the National Air 

Traffic Controllers Association in implementing this improved scheduling capability, notably in adopting schedules 

that reflect science-based strategies for managing the risks associated with controller fatigue.”

Air Navigation Service Providers “in other countries including Australia, Canada, and Germany 

have replaced their legacy scheduling tools with sophisticated software capable of incorporating 

all constraints while generating efficient controller schedules.” – National Academy of Sciences
28 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Technological Advances

In 2015, the FAA made significant progress toward completing the foundational phase of the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen).

Although there are many NextGen technologies, and foundational systems, in various stages of implementation, 

such as Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR), Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast (ADS-B), the NAS voice system, and Time Based Flow Management (TBFM), it is En Route Automation 

Modernization (ERAM) and Data Communications (Data Comm) that will have the most impact on air traffic controller 

productivity in the near term.

In early 2015, the FAA completed ERAM, arguably the most complex technology replacement program in the 

agency’s history. The last of 20 planned ERAM sites achieved operational readiness, which signified the full 

commissioning of ERAM into the National Airspace System (NAS) and enabled the FAA to begin decommissioning 

the legacy HOST system.

With ERAM, radar coverage extends beyond facility boundaries, enabling controllers to handle additional traffic 

more efficiently. ERAM processes data from up to 64 radars instead of the legacy prior system’s 24. ERAM enables 

a single air traffic control center to track up to 1,900 aircraft at a time, compared to HOST, which could track 1,100 

aircraft.

Controllers can share and coordinate more seamlessly between centers, making increased use of 3-nauticalmile aircraft separation in more parts of the airspace – reduced from 5 nautical-miles. ERAM improves flight-plan 

processing by allowing automatic — rather than manual — handoffs when a flight is diverted, improving efficiency 

during bad weather and congestion.

ERAM gives controllers the ability to customize what they see. A controller can turn all of the airplanes in one sector 

to a single color on the display, such as blue, to distinguish them from other aircraft in nearby airspace.

Data Comm is a key transformational program in the NextGen portfolio that provides a digital data mode of 

communication between air traffic controllers and pilots. It enables controllers to send routine instructions, such as 

revised departure clearances and weather-avoiding reroutes, directly to the flight deck with the push of a button. 

Data Comm reduces the communication time between controllers and pilots, decreasing the potential for errors in 

voice communication while enabling controllers to handle more traffic.

Data Comm service is now operational at 10 airport towers: Salt Lake City, New Orleans, Austin, San Antonio, 

Indianapolis, Louisville, John F. Kennedy, Newark, Houston Hobby and Houston Bush. The program is 13 months 

ahead of schedule. While the program is required to deliver the system to more than 50 towers by 2019, the FAA has 

challenged itself to complete the waterfall by the end of this year. 

In early fiscal year 2015, the FAA made the final investment decision and defined the technical scope, cost and 

schedule for Data Comm for initial En Route services.

The Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR) program upgrades multiple air traffic control 

technologies to a single, state-of-the-art platform: the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS). 

STARS is a foundational NextGen technology that enables ADS-B and other NextGen programs, giving air traffic 

controllers a more complete airspace picture. Under TAMR, the FAA is upgrading air traffic control technology at the 

54 sites where STARS is already operational, while older automation platforms are being replaced with STARS at 108 

additional facilities.

ADS-B, which is mandated by January 1, 2020 for aircraft operating in most controlled U.S. airspace, has been 

integrated into automation platforms at all En Route air traffic control facilities and major terminal radar facilities, 
29 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

adding additional facilities with each new introduction of STARS. As of November 2015, more than 14,000 general 

aviation aircraft and 535 commercial aircraft have been equipped with ADS-B avionics. The FAA also completed 

the nationwide deployment of ADS-B ground stations in 2014, and ADS-B traffic and weather broadcasts are now 

available nationwide.

As part of the NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC) prioritization effort, the FAA agreed to concentrate on four 

NextGen priorities: increasing the use of Performance Based (satellite-based) Navigation, making multiple runway 

operations more efficient, improving surface operations and data sharing, and implementing Data Communications.

Increased productivity and efficiency, and their ultimate impact on the size and composition of the FAA’s workforce, 

depend on many factors. The scope and precise impact of NextGen enhancements are still under development.

Over time, the relationship between pilots and air traffic controllers will evolve. The relationship between controller 

and automated systems will similarly evolve. These evolutions will occur gradually and require much testing and 

analysis to ensure the safety of the system.
30 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce
31 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 4 | Losses

In total, the FAA expects to lose over 1,600 controllers due to retirements, promotions and other losses this fiscal 

year. Other controller losses include transfers, resignations, removals, deaths, developmental attrition and academy 

attrition.

The FAA hires and staffs facilities so that trainees are fully prepared to take over responsibilities when senior 

controllers leave.

Controller Loss Summary

Table 4.1 shows the total estimated number of controllers that will be lost, by category, over the period FY 2016 

through FY 2025.

LOSS CATEGORY LOSSES: 2016 - 2025

Retirements 4,050

Resignations, Removals and Deaths 493

Developmental Attrition 1,590

Academy Attrition 3,101

Promotions/Transfers 2,709

TOTAL 11,943

TABLE 4.1 CONTROLLER LOSS SUMMARY
32 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Actual Controller Retirements

Fiscal year 2007 was correctly projected to be a peak year for retirements of controllers hired in the early 1980s. The 

long-anticipated retirement wave has passed, and annual retirements are expected to decline for the next ten years.

FIGURE 4.1 ACTUAL CONTROLLER RETIREMENTS
33 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Workforce Age Distribution

The agency hired a substantial number of controllers in the years immediately following the 1981 strike. This 

concentrated hiring wave meant a large portion of the controller workforce would reach retirement age in roughly 

the same time period. In September 2005, the age distribution peak on the right side of Figure 4.2 was greater than 

1,900 controllers. Today, the magnitude of that remaining peak is down to less than 800 controllers because the 

majority of the controllers hired shortly after the 1981 strike have already retired and been replaced.

FAA’s hiring plan is designed to phase in new hires as needed. Two distinct age bands can be seen in Figure 4.2. 

Controllers hired in the past several years can be seen in the 24 to 37 age band, which spans 14 years. The age 

band of those hired after the 1981 strike is shown in the 46-55 age band and covers only 10 years. By phasing in 

new hires, the age band of recent hires has become wider and is designed to avoid a spike in retirement eligibility in 

future years.

The FAA’s hiring plan is designed to phase in new hires as needed.

FIGURE 4.2 CONTROLLER WORKFORCE AGE DISTRIBUTION AS OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2015

Age Distribution
34 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Retirement Eligibility

In addition to normal civil service retirement criteria, controllers can become eligible under special retirement criteria 

for air traffic controllers (age 50 with 20 years of “good time” service or any age with 25 years “good time” service). 

“Good time” is defined as service in a covered position, as defined in Public Law 92-297. Under Public Law 92-297, 

air traffic controllers are usually required to retire at age 56.

After computing eligibility dates using all criteria, the FAA assigns the earliest of the dates as the eligibility date. 

Eligibility dates are then aggregated into classes based on the fiscal year in which eligibility occurs.

Figure 4.3 shows the number of controllers who are currently retirement eligible as of September 2015 and those 

projected to become retirement eligible each fiscal year through FY 2025. Agency projections show that an 

additional 298 controllers will become eligible to retire in FY 2016. The number of retirement eligible controllers has 

been in decline in recent years from the peak, and should continue to do so for the next few years.

Because of advance hiring, we have already replaced many of the controllers currently eligible to retire. The FAA 

strives to minimize retirement, hiring and training spikes through the process of examining trends and proactively 

planning years in advance of expected activity.

FIGURE 4.3 RETIREMENT ELIGIBILITY
35 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Retirement Pattern

History shows that not all controllers retire when they first become eligible. In 2015, 15.9 percent of controllers who 

first became eligible actually retired.

Since the economic downturn began in 2008, the FAA has observed that many controllers are delaying retirement 

until they get closer to the mandatory retirement age of 56. Because most controllers are retirement eligible at the 

age of 50, they typically reach mandatory retirement age in their seventh year of eligibility.

These trends are seen in Figure 4.4 below, which shows fewer controllers are retiring earlier in their eligibility and are 

waiting until closer to their mandatory retirement age.

Despite the increased likelihood of delayed retirement, the majority of controllers still leave the controller workforce 

prior to reaching the mandatory age.

FIGURE 4.4 PERCENT OF CONTROLLERS RETIRING IN THE NTH FISCAL YEAR OF THEIR ELIGIBILITY
36 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Losses Due to Retirements

For the current plan, the agency incorporated FY 2015 retirement data into the retirement histogram used for future 

retirement.

As in prior years, the FAA projected future retirements by analyzing both the eligibility criteria of the workforce (Figure 

4.3) and the pattern of retirement based on eligibility (Figure 4.4).

For each eligibility class (the fiscal year the controller first becomes eligible to retire), the agency applied the 

histogram percentage to estimate in Figure 4.5 the retirements for each class by year.

FY 2007 provided the high-water mark for controller retirements. Annual retirements are expected 

to continue to decline for the next decade.

FIGURE 4.5 RETIREMENT PROJECTION
37 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Losses Due to Resignations, Removals and Deaths

Estimated controller losses due to resignations, removals (excluding developmental attrition) and deaths are based 

on historical rates and shown in Table 4.2.

TABLE 4.2 CONTROLLER LOSSES DUE TO RESIGNATIONS, REMOVALS AND DEATHS

2015* 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

60 48 49 49 49 49 49 50 50 50 50

Developmental Attrition

Estimated losses of trainees who terminate from the FAA while still in developmental status are shown in Table 4.3. 

Hiring during FY 2015 was lower than projected, which causes the need for increased hiring at near-capacity levels 

from FY 2016 through FY 2018. Correspondingly, this plan incorporates a projected increase in developmental 

attrition for FY 2016 through FY 2020 as hires from these years progress through their training program.

TABLE 4.3 DEVELOPMENTAL ATTRITION

2015* 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

85 136 238 226 211 170 134 121 120 118 116

* Actual

* Actual
38 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Academy Attrition

Estimates of losses from new hires that are not successful in the FAA Academy training program are based on both 

historical rates as well as projections and are shown in Table 4.4. The projected Academy attrition in this plan is 

higher than the projections in prior plans. This was driven by observed higher failure rates at the FAA Academy in 

FY14 and FY15. FAA will continue to monitor Academy failure rates moving forward for the impact of these changes 

and adjust future projections accordingly. In addition, hiring during FY 2015 was lower than projected, which 

causes the need for increased hiring at near-capacity levels from FY 2016 through FY 2018. Correspondingly, this 

plan incorporates a projected increase in Academy attrition for FY 2016 through FY 2019 as hires from these years 

progress through their training program.

TABLE 4.4 ACADEMY ATTRITION

2015* 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

359 408 428 454 384 285 244 233 227 221 217

Controller Losses Due to Promotions and Other Transfers

This section presents FAA estimates of controller losses due to internal transfers to other positions (staff support 

specialists, traffic management coordinators, etc.) and controller losses due to promotions to front line manager 

(FLM) or air traffic management/supervisory positions.

Over the past five years, we’ve observed an average of 163 net promotions each year from CPC to supervisory 

positions. The majority of these promotions replace retiring supervisors. We expect net transfers to promotions to 

increase slightly and to peak at 207 in FY 2018 and slightly fall in future years as seen in Figure 4.6. 

FIGURE 4.6 CONTROLLER LOSSES DUE TO PROMOTIONS AND OTHER TRANSFERS

* Actual
39 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Total Controller Losses

The FAA projects a total loss of 11,943 controllers over the next 10 years.

Should losses outpace projections for FY 2016, the FAA will hire additional controllers to reach the end-of-year goal 

of 14,157 air traffic controllers on board.

FIGURE 4.7 PROJECTED TOTAL CONTROLLER LOSSES
40 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce
41 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 5 | Hiring Plan

The FAA safely operates and maintains the NAS because of the combined expertise of its people, the support of 

technology and the application of standardized procedures. Every day tens of thousands of aircraft are guided safely 

and expeditiously through the NAS to their destinations.

Deploying a well-trained and well-staffed air traffic control workforce plays an essential role in fulfilling this 

responsibility. The FAA’s current hiring plan has been designed to phase in new hires as needed. To staff the right 

number of people in the right places at the right time, the FAA develops annual hiring plans that are responsive to 

changes in traffic and in the controller workforce.

The FAA hires new developmental controllers in advance of the agency’s staffing needs in order to have ample 

time to train them to offset future attrition, including retirements, promotions, etc. Proper execution of the hiring 

plan, while flexibly adapting to the dynamic nature of traffic and attrition, is critical to the plan’s success. If the new 

developmentals are not placed correctly or if CPCs are not transferred from other facilities, shortages could occur at 

individual facilities that may affect schedules, increase overtime usage or require the use of more developmentals on 

position.

Staffing is and will continue to be monitored at all facilities throughout the year. The agency will continue to 

modify the hiring plan at the facility level should adjustments become necessary due to changes in traffic volume, 

retirements or other attrition.

There are thousands of qualified controller candidates eager to be hired. The FAA has again been able to attract 

large numbers of qualified controller candidates. Through a revised two-track controller hiring process, and use 

of the updated Employee Request Reassignment process, the FAA will attract and recruit a sufficient number of 

applicants to achieve this hiring plan.
42 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Controller Hiring Profile

The controller hiring profile is shown in Figure 5.1. The FAA hired 1,345 controllers compared to the plan of 1,772 

controllers in FY 2015. This created a significant backlog and subsequently increased the need for new controller 

hiring for several fiscal years into the future. We currently plan to spread hiring over FY 2016 to FY 2018, raising 

hiring projections in those years relative to last year’s plan. We spread the hiring to support better predictability at 

the Academy and facilities, and to smooth out workload for our medical and security personnel. The number of 

controllers projected to be hired through FY 2025 is 12,088.

The FAA hired 1,112 controllers in FY 2014 and 1,345 in FY 2015

FIGURE 5.1 CONTROLLER HIRING PROFILE
43 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Trainee-to-Total-Controller Percentage

The hiring plan allows the FAA to maintain an appropriate number of trainees (developmental and CPC-IT) in 

the workforce. The percentage shown is calculated as the sum of CPC-ITs plus developmentals divided by all 

controllers. While the FAA strives to keep the trainee percentage below 35 percent for both Terminal and En Route 

controllers, it is not the only metric used by the agency to measure trainee progress.

Figure 5.2 shows the projected trainee-to-total-controller percentages for En Route and Terminal by year to 2025.

While Terminal facilities are showing a decline through 2025, there is a slight uptick in the En Route percentage for 

the next several years as controllers in the current developmental pipeline become fully certified. Note the trainee 

percentage for both En Route and Terminal is still well below 35 percent. In general, the En Route trainee ratio 

exceeds the Terminal ratio primarily because of the longer times to certify (on average) in En Route facilities.

FIGURE 5.2 TRAINEE-TO-TOTAL-CONTROLLER PERCENTAGE
44 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Before the 1981 strike, the FAA experienced trainee percentages ranging from 23 to 44 percent. Following the strike, 

through the end of the hiring wave in 1992, the trainee percentage ranged from 24 to 52 percent. When the poststrike hires became fully certified by the end of decade, the trainee percentage declined.

As the new controllers hired en masse in the early 1980s achieved full certification, the subsequent need for new 

hires dropped significantly from 1993 to 2006. This caused trainee percentages to reach unusually low levels. The 

FAA’s current hiring plans return trainee percentages to their historical averages.

By phasing in new hires as needed, the FAA will level out the significant training spikes and troughs experienced over 

the last 40 years. Even though there was a long-expected trainee peak in 2009, the trainee percentage remains low 

as thousands of trainees hired over the past decade have become certified controllers.

Figure 5.3 shows historical trainee percentages from 1969 to the present.

FIGURE 5.3 HISTORICAL TRAINEE PERCENTAGE
45 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The FAA uses many metrics (e.g., 35 percent trainee to total controllers) to manage the flow of trainees while 

accomplishing daily operations. Facilities meter training to coincide with a number of dynamic factors, including 

technology upgrades, new runway construction and recurrent proficiency training for existing CPCs. Facility training 

is enabled by many factors. Examples include the use of contract instructors, access to simulators, scheduled 

overtime, and the seasonality and complexity of operations.

In itself, the actual number of trainees does not indicate the progress of each individual in the training program 

or the additional utility they provide that can help to supplement other on-the-job training instruction and support 

operations. A key facility measure of training performance is measurement of trainee completion time against the 

goals. The goal ranges from one and one-half years at our lower-level Terminal facilities to three years at our En 

Route facilities.

The FAA is striving to meet these goals by improving training and scheduling processes through increased use of 

simulators and better tracking of controller training using the FAA’s national training database.

The FAA will continue to closely monitor facilities to make sure trainees are progressing through each stage of 

training while also maintaining the safe and efficient operation of the NAS.
46 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 6 | Hiring Process

Controller Hiring Sources

The FAA has two primary categories of controller hiring sources.

• Prior ATCS experience: These individuals have at least 52 weeks of certified air traffic control experience and 

may apply for vacancies announced by the FAA.

• No prior ATCS experience: These individuals are not required to have prior air traffic control experience and 

may apply for vacancies announced by the FAA.

Recruitment

The agency continues to attract and recruit high-quality applicants into the controller workforce to meet staffing 

requirements.

In FY 2014, the FAA instituted an interim change to the air traffic control hiring process. The changes allowed 

the FAA to more efficiently compare applicants across previous hiring sources to select those candidates most 

likely to succeed as air traffic control specialists. Key benefits of the new approach included: (1) a single vacancy 

announcement; (2) a single set of minimum qualifications/eligibility requirements; (3) a multi-hurdle selection process 

with increased validity and efficiency; and (4) eliminated the Centralized Selection Panel process and Interview.

In January 2015, the FAA modified the interim changes by establishing a two-track announcement process for hiring 

air traffic control specialists. The first track included an announcement targeting applicants who have at least 52 

weeks of certified air traffic control experience in either civilian or military air traffic control facilities. The second 

track targeted candidates without operational air traffic control experience. In December 2015, the FAA launched an 

extended announcement for applicants with previous experience.

In FY 2016, the FAA will continue to recruit and hire air traffic control specialists to meet staffing requirements 

through the use of the two-track announcement process.
47 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 7 | Training

The foundation of our nation’s safe and efficient air traffic system is a workforce that is proficient in equipment, 

technology, systems and processes. New capabilities are being introduced into the National Airspace System 

and our professional air traffic controllers must learn these tools and develop new skills in order for the aviation 

community to maximize the full benefits of the Next Generation Air Transportation System. They must prepare for 

NextGen while they seamlessly continue to operate in the current environment.

The FAA’s Office of Safety and Technical Training is helping the agency to firmly instill its safety mission in controllers 

from the start of their careers. The powerful combination of safety, training and quality assurance enhances the FAA’s 

ability to identify, mitigate and manage risks, and integrate lessons learned into the technical training curriculum. 

The training program for air traffic controllers is governed by FAA Order 3120.4, Air Traffic Technical Training, and is 

reviewed annually to ensure its technical accuracy.

We are meeting the challenge of training both new and experienced controllers by streamlining the training process, 

refreshing course content, incorporating simulation, and investing in training technology so our controllers can 

continue to operate the safest, most efficient airspace system in the world.

The Training Process

New hires with no previous air traffic control experience begin their federal career training at the FAA Academy, 

where they learn foundational aviation knowledge through classroom lectures, team exercises and computer-based 

instruction, and practice basic air traffic control skills using low-, medium- and high-fidelity simulation devices. 

The academy lays the foundation for employee development by teaching common, fundamental air traffic control 

principles and procedures that are used at facilities throughout the country. After successfully completing training 

at the FAA Academy, developmental controllers are assigned to a field location, where they enter additional, sitespecific qualification training and hone their technical abilities in the operational environment. This phase of training 

begins in the classroom, where students learn facility-specific equipment, rules and procedures. After students 

master initial learning objectives, the instruction transitions to simulators where learners can apply their knowledge 

and improve their skills in a hands-on, repetitive and safe environment. Finally, employees enter the on-the-job 

training phase working the control position, where their performance is carefully monitored by certified professional 

controllers who help trainees develop their techniques in a progressively difficult live-traffic environment.

New hires with previous air traffic experience are selected directly for a field facility and usually begin their federal 

service in an accelerated training program customized for their prior aviation experience. They are able to bypass 

certain phases of training, but they are required to meet the same certification standards for each control position as 

new hires with no previous experience.

The goal of all new employees is to become a certified professional controller (CPC), which is when they are finally 

considered to be at the full-performance level. Once developmental controllers are certified on control positions, 

they often work independently in those positions under the direction of a supervisor to gain experience and to 

supplement staffing.

All controllers are assigned periodic proficiency training and participate in both mandatory and optional supplemental 

training. For example, through the Flight Deck Training program, controllers experience air traffic control from the 

flight crew’s perspective by observing a flight from the cockpit. The program, which logged more than 5,100 flights 

in 2015, provides a setting for pilots and controllers to dialog face-to-face on various operational topics, even as the 

crew is performing those maneuvers.
48 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The recurrent training program is administered every six months as a combination of classroom and computerbased instruction for air traffic controllers. It delivers evidence-based topics derived from the Air Traffic Safety Action 

Program (ATSAP), Quality Assurance and Quality Control activities and data. As contrasted with annually required 

refresher training on static topics, recurrent training delivers timely and relevant training based on safety trends and 

lessons learned from our analysis. Recurrent training is developed in collaboration with subject matter experts from 

the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.

Designing and Delivering Effective Training

The FAA has adopted an outcomes-based approach to the design and development of training. This approach, 

implemented in FAA Order 3000.22, Air Traffic Organization Outcomes-Based Technical Training, refers to the 

strategy used to design individual courses and is based on the performance requirements found in the competency 

model. It uses the collection of job tasks, knowledge, skills and abilities to define the operational outcome required 

for the controller’s job so that training can be designed accordingly. It is a newer approach to instructional systems 

design that involves mapping curriculum to job tasks, knowledge, skills and training methods. New training 

development will use the outcomes-based methodology.

The Agency has recently refreshed the introductory En Route, Tower and Terminal Radar training courses at the FAA 

Academy to support cumulative grading. In courses that use the cumulative grading system, students are assessed 

at multiple points in training, with many training advancement decision points, so that underperforming students are 

either provided remedial training or are released from the FAA.

The FAA is increasing the use of simulators – technology that allows instructors to duplicate and play back actual 

operating events to give students opportunities for improvement in a safe environment. Simulators enable students 

to not only see the cause and effect, but also to avoid mistakes in the future. Since live traffic is inconsistent and 

unpredictable due to weather and system delays, a controller may have to wait days or weeks for an opportunity to 

learn a particular procedure, and even longer to become proficient at it. The FAA builds simulation into its curriculum 

to help compress the training timeline while also improving the students’ learning experience and reducing training 

costs. In 2015, the FAA mandated that facilities with access to simulation capabilities must use those training 

devices to complete locally identified, evidence-based refresher training.

Experienced instructors, certified professional controllers, and contractors provide both classroom and simulation 

training at the FAA Academy and at many field locations. In September 2015, the FAA successfully transitioned 

from the Air Traffic Control Optimum Training Solution, in use since 2007, to the FAA Controller Training Contract 

to supplement the agency’s controller training requirements nationally. The FAA ensures everyone who instructs 

developmental controllers – whether they are federal employees or contractors – has the background and skills 

needed to train new employees. Most of the contract instructors are highly experienced former FAA controllers who 

retired after more than three decades of federal service.

The FAA initiated a multi-year, three-step program to revise and update its training courses for on-the-job-training 

field instructors. It is especially important for field instructors to maintain proficiency on all of the latest skills, new 

procedures and technologies coming into the system through NextGen improvements as well as prepare to instruct 

students who represent a new generation.
49 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Infrastructure Investments

To improve access to training content delivered using the eLearning Management System (eLMS), especially at 

more remote locations with limited internet access and bandwidth, the FAA designed a Content Delivery Network 

(CDN) that replicates eLMS training content and makes it available at each facility on a local area network. Instead of 

downloading bandwidth-intensive content every time it is viewed, students are able to access the content with less 

buffering and interruptions. Sites with the CDN configuration have the ability to view more robust training typically 

associated with multimedia and simulation, which provides more of an interactive learning capability for students. At 

the end of 2015, all federal Airport Traffic Control Towers, Air Route Traffic Control Centers, and large Terminal Radar 

Approach Control facilities have the CDN capability. By end of 2016, the FAA expects all air traffic facilities to have a 

CDN.

The Office of Safety and Technical Training also invested in its high-fidelity Tower Simulator System (TSS), a highly 

effective training device that has provided an interactive, highly realistic environment for controller training for 

more than a decade. There are 50 simulators installed at 32 locations, and these systems support training for 155 

airports using a “hub and spoke” arrangement where employees at remote facilities travel to central locations to 

use the simulator. Last year, the FAA awarded a five-year maintenance and sustainment contract for the TSS. This 

year, the FAA plans to make the final investment decision on a technical refresh program that will replace computer 

processors and bulb-based projectors with the TSS.

While access to simulators has improved the quality of training for the controller workforce, we still need to be able 

to design accurate training scenarios for those simulators. The FAA continues to expand Simfast, a home-grown 

scenario creation tool for terminal radar facilities, to more than 100 locations. Before Simfast, controllers spent 

about 40 hours designing one hour of simulation for a complex, realistic air traffic radar scenario; with an improved 

interface running on a standalone computer, designers using Simfast can create the same complex scenarios in 

under two hours.

Time to Certification

The FAA continues to meet its overall goals for time to certification and number of controllers certified. 

Implementation of foundational NextGen platforms, such as ERAM and TAMR, and new training requirements are 

factors that affect overall time to CPC. Depending on the type of facility, facility level (complexity) and the number of 

candidates to certify, controllers are expected to complete certification in one and one-half to three years.

Nearly 84% of those who began training in fiscal years 2007 through 2011 successfully completed training at 

their first facility or a subsequent facility. Completion means that employees achieved FAA CPC status. The 

remaining members of the hiring classes (16%) have been removed from the agency, resigned or are still in training. 

Developmental controllers who fail to certify at a facility may be removed from service or reassigned to a less 

complex facility in accordance with agency policies and directives. 

Table 7.1 shows the FAA’s training targets and average training completion time by facility type for those who began 

training in fiscal year 2007 through 2011. Only those who achieved CPC status at their first facility assignment are 

included in the average training completion times displayed because incorporation of training times at additional 

facilities can skew the average. Additionally, training data for hiring classes after fiscal year 2012 are not reported 

here because greater than 10 percent of the class are still in active phases of training, resulting in continuously 

changing metrics as those students certify or fail.
50 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Preparing for NextGen

As the FAA transitions to the Next Generation Air Transportation System, the key to providing safe, reliable and 

efficient air traffic services remains the same: highly skilled, trained and certified professionals. The Office of 

Safety and Technical Training must maintain curricula to keep pace with the evolving NAS, modernize how the 

FAA trains employees, incorporate new techniques and technologies for learning, and improve data collection and 

sharing. Training professionals are part of an FAA team that evaluates how NextGen will change the air traffic work 

environment and what competencies will be required for the future workforce. The FAA is incorporating what it learns 

from this evolving and ongoing process into training programs as new systems are implemented. Outcomes-based 

training aligns NextGen functionality with job tasks as well, so that the training organization can make predictions on 

how programs will need to change with the advent of NextGen. 

FAA GOAL FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011

Terminal 4-6 1.5 1.88 2.13 2.47 2.27 1.81

Terminal 7-9 2.0 1.92 2.26 2.50 2.36 2.04

Terminal 10-12 2.5 2.04 2.30 2.59 2.33 2.16

En Route 3.0 2.57 2.75 3.01 3.02 3.00

Note: More recent hiring classes (FY2012 forward) are not reported as there are still greater than 10 percent of the class in progress, resulting in 

continuously changing metrics as those students certify or fail.

TABLE 7.1 YEARS TO CERTIFY
51 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Chapter 8 | Funding Status

In addition to direct training costs, the FAA will incur salary and other costs for developmental controllers before they

certify. The average compensation cost of a developmental in FY 2016 is projected to be $100,155.

Figure 8.1 depicts expected annual compensation costs of developmentals, as well as the expected number of 

developmentals by year through 2025. As training takes one and one-half to three years, the chart depicts a rolling 

total of hires and costs from the current and previous years. It also incorporates the effect of the controller contract.

FIGURE 8.1 ESTIMATED COST OF DEVELOPMENTALS BEFORE CERTIFICATION
52 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Appendix | 2016 Facility Staffing Ranges

The Appendix below presents controller staffing ranges, by facility, for En Route and Terminal air traffic control 

facilities for FY 2016. Additional detail on how the staffing ranges are calculated is provided in Chapter 3.

In general, the FAA strives to keep the number of CPCs and CPC-ITs near the middle of the range. While most 

of the work is accomplished by CPCs, work is also being performed in facilities by CPC-IT and position-qualified 

developmental controllers who are proficient, or checked out, in specific sectors or positions and handle work 

independently. Accordingly, facilities can safely operate even with CPC staffing levels below the defined staffing 

range.

Conversely, a facility’s total staffing levels are often above the defined staffing range because new controllers are 

typically hired two to three years in advance of expected attrition to allow for sufficient training time. The total 

expected end-of-year staffing number shown in Figure 3.1 reflects this projected advanced hiring.

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

ZAB Albuquerque ARTCC 154 2 30 186 165 202

ZAN Anchorage ARTCC 67 9 32 108 85 103

ZAU Chicago ARTCC 313 17 44 374 279 341

ZBW Boston ARTCC 208 4 47 259 177 217

ZDC Washington ARTCC 281 14 19 314 253 310

ZDV Denver ARTCC 229 10 40 279 226 277

ZFW Fort Worth ARTCC 248 21 43 312 261 319

ZHU Houston ARTCC 225 12 32 269 237 289

ZID Indianapolis ARTCC 257 15 52 324 248 303

ZJX Jacksonville ARTCC 264 2 12 278 223 272

ZKC Kansas City ARTCC 200 7 43 250 197 241

ZLA Los Angeles ARTCC 228 18 38 284 216 265

ZLC Salt Lake City ARTCC 145 2 30 177 141 172

ZMA Miami ARTCC 222 4 45 271 219 268

ZME Memphis ARTCC 241 6 35 282 221 270

ZMP Minneapolis ARTCC 221 9 37 267 224 274

ZNY New York ARTCC 225 10 73 308 236 288

ZOA Oakland ARTCC 163 19 57 239 174 212

ZOB Cleveland ARTCC 312 4 35 351 280 342

ZSE Seattle ARTCC 133 10 44 187 134 164

ZSU San Juan ARTCC 39 7 15 61 45 55

ZTL Atlanta ARTCC 325 12 26 363 314 384

ZUA Guam ARTCC 13 3 2 18 14 17

EN ROUTE TOTAL 4,713 217 831 5,761 4,569 5,585

NOTE: Facility numbers do not include new hires at the FAA Academy
53 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

A11 Anchorage TRACON 18 9 7 34 20 25

A80 Atlanta TRACON 70 16 4 90 81 100

A90 Boston TRACON 52 2 1 55 50 61

ABE Allentown Tower 18 5 5 28 21 26

ABI Abilene Tower 12 0 11 23 16 19

ABQ Albuquerque Tower 25 6 2 33 21 26

ACK Nantucket Tower 8 1 3 12 9 10

ACT Waco Tower 14 0 11 25 16 20

ACY Atlantic City Tower 16 4 10 30 19 24

ADS Addison Tower 12 1 1 14 9 12

ADW Andrews Tower 10 0 4 14 11 13

AFW Alliance Tower 13 2 3 18 14 17

AGC Allegheny Tower 15 1 2 18 9 11

AGS Augusta Tower 13 1 2 16 12 15

ALB Albany Tower 17 2 7 26 20 24

ALO Waterloo Tower 9 0 4 13 9 12

AMA Amarillo Tower 12 0 13 25 15 18

ANC Anchorage Tower 23 2 1 26 22 27

APA Centennial Tower 18 3 2 23 19 23

APC Napa Tower 8 0 5 13 6 8

ARB Ann Arbor Tower 8 0 0 8 7 9

ARR Aurora Tower 6 1 5 12 8 10

ASE Aspen Tower 10 0 5 15 11 13

ATL Atlanta Tower 44 6 0 50 42 51

AUS Austin Tower 31 8 0 39 33 40

AVL Asheville Tower 10 2 5 17 14 17

AVP Wilkes-Barre Tower 15 0 5 20 16 20

AZO Kalamazoo Tower 11 3 7 21 15 18

BDL Bradley Tower 14 1 2 17 10 13

BED Hanscom Tower 12 1 6 19 11 14

BFI Boeing Tower 19 4 2 25 14 17

BFL Bakersfield Tower 15 1 12 28 14 18

BGM Binghamton Tower 13 1 4 18 10 12

BGR Bangor Tower 16 0 5 21 16 19

BHM Birmingham Tower 21 3 8 32 22 27

BIL Billings Tower 13 1 9 23 17 21

BIS Bismarck Tower 10 0 3 13 12 14

BJC Broomfield Tower 12 1 0 13 9 12

BNA Nashville Tower 32 8 3 43 32 40

BOI Boise Tower 25 7 2 34 24 29

BOS Boston Tower 33 0 0 33 28 34

BPT Beaumont Tower 8 0 5 13 8 10

BTR Baton Rouge Tower 14 5 5 24 17 20

BTV Burlington Tower 16 0 11 27 16 19

BUF Buffalo Tower 23 3 7 33 23 29
54 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

BUR Burbank Tower 15 5 3 23 14 17

BWI Baltimore Tower 28 3 1 32 19 23

C90 Chicago TRACON 66 33 1 100 83 101

CAE Columbia Tower 17 1 6 24 18 21

CAK Akron-Canton Tower 20 2 2 24 15 18

CCR Concord Tower 9 0 3 12 10 12

CDW Caldwell Tower 9 0 3 12 8 9

CHA Chattanooga Tower 17 1 3 21 16 19

CHS Charleston Tower 21 0 9 30 20 24

CID Cedar Rapids Tower 12 2 4 18 13 16

CKB Clarksburg Tower 14 0 5 19 12 14

CLE Cleveland Tower 44 3 4 51 30 37

CLT Charlotte Tower 70 23 1 94 71 87

CMA Camarillo Tower 5 1 9 15 9 11

CMH Columbus Tower 43 6 1 50 37 45

CMI Champaign Tower 12 0 9 21 12 14

CNO Chino Tower 10 3 1 14 9 11

COS Colorado Springs Tower 21 7 5 33 21 26

CPR Casper Tower 9 0 10 19 10 12

CPS Downtown Tower 10 0 0 10 9 11

CRP Corpus Christi Tower 26 7 4 37 27 32

CRQ Palomar Tower 16 0 0 16 9 11

CRW Charleston Tower 21 3 2 26 16 20

CSG Columbus Tower 7 0 1 8 4 5

CVG Cincinnati Tower 37 3 5 45 36 43

D01 Denver TRACON 55 16 0 71 64 78

D10 Dallas-Fort Worth TRACON 54 27 11 92 78 95

D21 Detroit TRACON 35 16 0 51 45 56

DAB Daytona Beach Tower 31 15 8 54 47 58

DAL Dallas Love Tower 20 2 1 23 19 24

DAY Dayton Tower 15 0 2 17 11 13

DCA Washington National Tower 24 8 3 35 23 28

DEN Denver Tower 37 3 0 40 32 40

DFW DFW Tower 42 7 0 49 48 59

DLH Duluth Tower 16 0 5 21 18 22

DPA Dupage Tower 11 2 3 16 11 13

DSM Des Moines Tower 15 2 5 22 16 20

DTW Detroit Tower 30 5 0 35 28 34

DVT Deer Valley Tower 17 2 1 20 16 19

DWH Hooks Tower 13 1 2 16 10 12

ELM Elmira Tower 13 0 5 18 9 11

ELP El Paso Tower 14 2 7 23 20 24

EMT El Monte Tower 8 2 1 11 9 11

ERI Erie Tower 11 1 11 23 14 17
55 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

EUG Eugene Tower 19 2 4 25 16 20

EVV Evansville Tower 13 1 6 20 12 15

EWR Newark Tower 27 9 0 36 28 34

F11 Central Florida TRACON 38 13 0 51 42 51

FAI Fairbanks Tower 18 0 14 32 18 22

FAR Fargo Tower 18 1 0 19 15 18

FAT Fresno Tower 16 7 5 28 21 25

FAY Fayetteville Tower 14 4 8 26 17 21

FCM Flying Cloud Tower 10 1 1 12 9 11

FFZ Falcon Tower 13 0 1 14 12 14

FLL Fort Lauderdale Tower 26 1 3 30 22 27

FLO Florence Tower 9 1 5 15 10 12

FNT Flint Tower 16 0 1 17 11 14

FPR St Lucie Tower 9 0 2 11 11 13

FRG Farmingdale Tower 11 2 6 19 11 13

FSD Sioux Falls Tower 14 1 2 17 14 17

FSM Fort Smith Tower 19 1 6 26 22 26

FTW Meacham Tower 13 1 4 18 14 17

FWA Fort Wayne Tower 16 0 8 24 16 20

FXE Fort Lauderdale Tower 15 0 4 19 13 15

GCN Grand Canyon Tower 7 2 2 11 8 10

GEG Spokane Tower 22 5 2 29 20 25

GFK Grand Forks Tower 24 1 0 25 17 21

GGG Longview Tower 13 1 9 23 15 18

GPT Gulfport Tower 11 3 4 18 13 16

GRB Green Bay Tower 14 2 2 18 17 21

GRR Grand Rapids Tower 14 3 4 21 17 21

GSO Greensboro Tower 21 4 5 30 21 26

GSP Greer Tower 13 0 10 23 17 20

GTF Great Falls Tower 13 0 8 21 12 14

HCF Honolulu Control Facility 64 4 14 82 86 105

HEF Manassas Tower 13 0 1 14 9 10

HIO Hillsboro Tower 16 2 0 18 12 14

HLN Helena Tower 7 0 5 12 7 9

HOU Hobby Tower 19 2 0 21 18 22

HPN Westchester Tower 13 1 5 19 11 13

HSV Huntsville Tower 16 1 3 20 14 17

HTS Huntington Tower 15 0 6 21 13 15

HUF Terre Haute Tower 12 0 6 18 15 18

HWD Hayward Tower 11 0 3 14 8 10

I90 Houston TRACON 71 18 0 89 79 96

IAD Dulles Tower 31 5 2 38 25 31

IAH Houston Intercontinental Tower 32 7 0 39 29 35

ICT Wichita Tower 23 5 3 31 25 30
56 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

ILG Wilmington Tower 10 2 1 13 8 10

ILM Wilmington Tower 14 1 6 21 15 18

IND Indianapolis Tower 33 11 5 49 34 42

ISP Islip Tower 12 1 5 18 12 14

ITO Hilo Tower 12 1 3 16 11 14

JAN Jackson Tower 10 0 7 17 13 16

JAX Jacksonville Tower 32 6 9 47 37 45

JCF Chicago 20 5 4 29 20 25

JFK Kennedy Tower 27 6 2 35 29 35

JNU Juneau Tower 13 0 3 16 11 13

K90 Cape TRACON 24 0 4 28 18 21

L30 Las Vegas TRACON 38 17 1 56 40 48

LAF Lafayette Tower 7 2 1 10 8 9

LAN Lansing Tower 18 1 3 22 17 21

LAS Las Vegas Tower 35 5 0 40 32 39

LAX Los Angeles Tower 36 14 0 50 39 48

LBB Lubbock Tower 14 0 6 20 15 18

LCH Lake Charles Tower 11 0 7 18 12 14

LEX Lexington Tower 20 3 0 23 19 23

LFT Lafayette Tower Lafayette 13 2 7 22 14 18

LGA La Guardia Tower 30 7 1 38 26 32

LGB Long Beach Tower 20 3 0 23 18 21

LIT Little Rock Tower 21 6 5 32 21 26

LNK Lincoln Tower 9 0 3 12 9 11

LOU Bowman Tower 10 0 2 12 8 10

LVK Livermore Tower 9 2 1 12 8 10

M03 Memphis TRACON 24 3 5 32 25 31

M98 Minneapolis TRACON 45 9 0 54 48 59

MAF Midland Tower 15 1 8 24 15 19

MBS Saginaw Tower 13 0 3 16 10 12

MCI Kansas City Tower 27 9 5 41 29 35

MCO Orlando Tower 26 8 0 34 23 28

MDT Harrisburg Tower 21 2 7 30 19 23

MDW Midway Tower 17 8 0 25 21 25

MEM Memphis Tower 21 5 6 32 20 25

MFD Mansfield Tower 11 0 7 18 13 15

MGM Montgomery Tower 14 4 6 24 16 19

MHT Manchester Tower 13 0 0 13 10 12

MIA Miami Tower 60 28 1 89 81 99

MIC Crystal Tower 9 1 0 10 9 11

MKC Downtown Tower 12 2 2 16 11 13

MKE Milwaukee Tower 39 7 0 46 31 38

MKG Muskegon Tower 10 0 9 19 13 16

MLI Quad City Tower 9 0 11 20 14 18
57 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

MLU Monroe Tower 11 0 8 19 11 14

MMU Morristown Tower 12 0 2 14 8 10

MOB Mobile Tower 18 2 2 22 18 22

MRI Merrill Tower 12 0 0 12 9 10

MRY Monterey Tower 7 0 1 8 7 9

MSN Madison Tower 19 2 1 22 15 18

MSP Minneapolis Tower 33 6 0 39 30 37

MSY New Orleans Tower 24 7 3 34 30 37

MWH Grant County Tower 9 0 10 19 12 15

MYF Montgomery Tower 12 1 0 13 11 13

MYR Myrtle Beach Tower 14 3 5 22 23 28

N90 New York TRACON 144 23 29 196 174 213

NCT Northern California TRACON 141 18 6 165 151 184

NEW Lakefront Tower 7 1 1 9 7 8

NMM Meridian TRACON 4 0 0 4 10 12

OAK Oakland Tower 24 4 0 28 18 22

OGG Maui Tower 10 0 5 15 9 11

OKC Oklahoma City Tower 26 0 4 30 26 32

OMA Eppley Tower 13 1 4 18 11 13

ONT Ontario Tower 16 1 2 19 11 13

ORD Chicago O’Hare Tower 49 19 4 72 59 72

ORF Norfolk Tower 24 5 11 40 23 29

ORL Orlando Executive Tower 9 0 2 11 9 11

P31 Pensacola TRACON 27 6 3 36 29 36

P50 Phoenix TRACON 44 13 0 57 53 65

P80 Portland TRACON 22 6 4 32 25 30

PAE Paine Tower 11 3 1 15 9 11

PAO Palo Alto Tower 8 1 4 13 9 11

PBI Palm Beach Tower 33 9 5 47 36 43

PCT Potomac TRACON 141 19 5 165 136 166

PDK DeKalb-Peachtree Tower 13 2 1 16 12 15

PDX Portland Tower 22 5 3 30 20 24

PHF Patrick Henry Tower 11 0 0 11 8 10

PHL Philadelphia Tower 71 16 0 87 63 76

PHX Phoenix Tower 28 9 0 37 25 30

PIA Peoria Tower 11 0 11 22 15 19

PIE St Petersburg Tower 11 1 4 16 8 10

PIT Pittsburgh Tower 34 4 5 43 35 43

PNE Northeast Philadelphia Tower 9 1 4 14 7 9

PNS Pensacola Tower 8 0 5 13 9 11

POC Brackett Tower 9 1 5 15 9 11

POU Poughkeepsie Tower 9 1 1 11 8 10

PRC Prescott Tower 11 2 3 16 13 16

PSC Pasco Tower 13 3 5 21 14 17
58 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

PSP Palm Springs Tower 9 0 4 13 8 10

PTK Pontiac Tower 12 0 4 16 11 13

PUB Pueblo Tower 10 1 3 14 12 15

PVD Providence Tower 22 2 5 29 23 28

PWK Chicago Executive Tower 8 2 1 11 9 11

PWM Portland Tower 17 2 3 22 17 20

R90 Omaha TRACON 19 3 0 22 17 21

RDG Reading Tower 12 1 8 21 14 17

RDU Raleigh-Durham Tower 31 13 3 47 34 42

RFD Rockford Tower 16 0 7 23 18 22

RHV Reid-Hillview Tower 11 0 5 16 10 12

RIC Richmond Tower 14 0 1 15 11 14

RNO Reno Tower 13 0 4 17 11 14

ROA Roanoke Tower 18 3 7 28 19 23

ROC Rochester Tower 24 0 6 30 21 26

ROW Roswell Tower 11 1 4 16 12 14

RST Rochester Tower 13 1 3 17 10 13

RSW Fort Myers Tower 18 7 10 35 25 30

RVS Riverside Tower 12 1 3 16 11 13

S46 Seattle TRACON 42 5 0 47 43 53

S56 Salt Lake City TRACON 32 7 6 45 36 44

SAN San Diego Tower 16 3 6 25 18 22

SAT San Antonio Tower 37 11 1 49 37 45

SAV Savannah Tower 21 2 5 28 19 23

SBA Santa Barbara Tower 29 2 1 32 22 27

SBN South Bend Tower 12 1 13 26 19 23

SCK Stockton Tower 7 0 4 11 8 9

SCT Southern California TRACON 204 32 7 243 193 235

SDF Standiford Tower 35 8 5 48 34 42

SDL Scottsdale Tower 11 3 0 14 10 12

SEA Seattle Tower 28 1 0 29 26 32

SEE Gillespie Tower 10 4 2 16 12 15

SFB Sanford Tower 17 2 2 21 17 21

SFO San Francisco Tower 29 2 0 31 28 34

SGF Springfield Tower 22 1 3 26 22 27

SHV Shreveport Tower 14 0 13 27 18 22

SJC San Jose Tower 15 2 3 20 11 14

SJU San Juan Tower 15 1 2 18 13 16

SLC Salt Lake City Tower 26 4 0 30 24 29

SMF Sacramento Tower 16 0 3 19 11 13

SMO Santa Monica Tower 9 2 5 16 9 11

SNA John Wayne Tower 23 3 2 28 20 24

SPI Springfield Tower 8 0 5 13 10 13

SRQ Sarasota Tower 11 0 3 14 10 12
59 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/19/15 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

STL St Louis Tower 19 2 0 21 16 19

STP St Paul Tower 12 0 0 12 8 10

STS Sonoma Tower 7 0 5 12 7 9

STT St Thomas Tower 9 0 2 11 8 9

SUS Spirit Tower 10 0 5 15 10 13

SUX Sioux Gateway Tower 10 0 6 16 9 11

SYR Syracuse Tower 16 0 11 27 17 21

T75 St Louis TRACON 29 5 1 35 27 32

TEB Teterboro Tower 16 6 5 27 15 19

TLH Tallahassee Tower 17 1 2 20 14 17

TMB Tamiami Tower 14 2 0 16 14 17

TOA Torrance Tower 8 2 6 16 8 10

TOL Toledo Tower 16 1 5 22 16 20

TPA Tampa Tower 42 14 0 56 46 56

TRI Tri-Cities Tower 13 2 5 20 13 16

TUL Tulsa Tower 26 1 3 30 24 29

TUS Tucson Tower 15 1 1 17 12 15

TVC Traverse City Tower 6 0 3 9 8 10

TWF Twin Falls Tower 6 0 4 10 7 9

TYS Knoxville Tower 20 1 10 31 21 25

U90 Tucson TRACON 15 3 0 18 14 18

VGT North Las Vegas Tower 6 5 2 13 10 12

VNY Van Nuys Tower 18 4 0 22 15 19

VRB Vero Beach Tower 8 0 4 12 11 13

Y90 Yankee TRACON 20 1 5 26 19 23

YIP Willow Run Tower 12 1 4 17 10 12

YNG Youngstown Tower 17 3 2 22 16 19

TERMINAL TOTAL 6,117 1,001 1,128 8,246 6,201 7,566

EN ROUTE TOTAL 4,713 217 831 5,761 4,569 5,585

TERMINAL TOTAL 6,117 1,001 1,128 8,246 6,201 7,566

GRAND TOTAL 10,830 1,218 1,959 14,007 10,770 13,151

NOTE: Facility numbers do not include new hires at the FAA Academy
U.S. Department of Transportation

2016-ABA-037 • Produced by FAA Communications

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591