| 1

1

A Plan for the Future

10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

2015–2024
|

This 2015 report is the FAA’s tenth 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 20, 2014. 

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.
Table of Contents | 3

3

4 Executive Summary

6 Chapter 1: Introduction

6 Staffing to Traffic

8 Meeting the Challenge

10 Chapter 2: Facilities and Services

10 Terminal and En Route Air Traffic Services

10 FAA Air Traffic Control Facilities

12	 Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements

15 Staffing Ranges

20 Air Traffic Staffing Standards Overview

22 Tower Cab Overview

23 TRACON Overview

24 En Route Overview

24 Summary

25 Air Traffic Staffing Standards Review

26 Air Traffic Controller Scheduling

27 Specify Demand

28 Manage a Schedule/Day of Operation Views

29 OPAS Lite

30 Air Traffic Scheduling Software Review

31 Technological Advances

32 Chapter 4: Losses 

32 Controller Loss Summary

33 Actual Controller Retirements

34 Controller Workforce Age Distribution

35 Controller Retirement Eligibility

36 Controller Retirement Pattern

37 Controller Losses Due to Retirements

38 Controller Losses Due to Resignations, 

Removals and Deaths

38 Developmental Attrition

38 Academy Attrition

39 Controller Losses Due to Promotions and 

Other Transfers

40 Total Controller Losses

42	 Chapter 5: Hiring Plan

43 Controller Hiring Profile

44 Trainee-to-Total-Controller Percentage

47	 Chapter 6: Hiring Process

47 Controller Hiring Sources

47 Recruitment

48	 Chapter 7: Training

48 FAA’s Call to Action

48 The Training Process

49 FAA Academy Training

49 FAA Facility Training

49 Recurrent Training

49 Infrastructure Investments

50 Time to Certification

50 Preparing for NextGen

52	 Chapter 8: Funding Status

53	 Appendix A: En Route Facility Controller

Staffing Ranges

54 Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller 

Staffing Ranges

Table of Contents
Executive Summary

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

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

(NAS). 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 24 percent 

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

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 (CPC) and 

Certified Professional Controllers in Training (CPC-IT) 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 2014 retirements were close to projections, and also slightly higher than 2013 actuals, while 2015 retirements 

are currently tracking in line with the 2015 projected figure from last year’s controller workforce plan. Annual retirements 

continue to fall since the long-anticipated wave of retirements crested eight years ago, in 2007. Retirements are expected 

to continue to fall in the next decade. In the last five years, 2,975 controllers have retired. The FAA carefully tracks actual 

retirements and projects future losses to ensure its recruitment and training keep pace. 
Executive Summary | 5

5

HIRING

In the last five years, the FAA has hired approximately 4,400 new air traffic controllers. We plan to hire more than 6,300 

new controllers over the next five years to keep pace with expected attrition and traffic growth. Due to the continuing 

effects of the hiring freeze from March 2013 through December 2013, the FAA hired 1,112 controllers compared to the 

previously reported plan of 1,286.

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.

The FAA continues its efforts in response to an Independent Review Panel in 2011 that focused on air traffic controller 

selection, assignment and training. The panel, part of a nationwide Call to Action on air traffic control safety and 

professionalism, delivered its comprehensive set of recommendations to the agency for review and implementation.

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-theart 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.
Chapter 1: Introduction

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

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 non-commercial 

activity. Commercial activity includes air carrier and commuter/air taxi traffic. Non-commercial activity includes general 

aviation and military traffic.

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 24 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.
Chapter 1: Introduction | 7

7

Figure 1.2 shows system-wide controller staffing and traffic, indexed from 2000 and projected through 2024. 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 the figure 

below, “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 2020. 

The headcount and CPC+CPC-IT lines converge due to reduced retirements and other losses.
8 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

MEETING THE CHALLENGE

The FAA hires in advance to reflect all attrition, not just retirements. While the long-predicted wave of retirements 

has passed, we revised our plan to increase FY 2015 and FY 2016 hires so that we can catch up from the effects of 

sequestration and a hiring freeze experienced in the first three months of FY 2014.

The FAA’s current hiring plan has been 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 continue to fall as the long-anticipated wave of retirements crested eight years ago, in 2007. Retirements 

are expected to continue to fall for the next decade. Starting in FY 2017 we will enter a steady-state period in which 

we expect new hires to approximately mirror the number of losses for the next several years.

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:

• Convened an Independent Review Panel that focused on air traffic controller selection, assignment and training.

• Implemented changes to its air traffic control hiring process.

• Procured a commercially available off-the-shelf scheduling product that provides a common toolset for FAA facilities to 

effectively develop and maintain optimal schedules based on traffic, staffing, work rules and qualifications.

Effective and efficient training, properly placing new and transferring controllers, and efficient scheduling of controllers 

are all 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.
Chapter 1: Introduction | 9

9
Chapter 2: Facilities and Services

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

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 1,280 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, including 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. Aircrafts 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, 2014, the FAA operated 316 air traffic control facilities, including the Air Traffic Control System Command 

Center, in the United States. 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.
Chapter 2: Facilities and Services | 11

11

Table 2.1: Types and Number of FAA Air Traffic Control Facilities

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
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements

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

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. For example, in FY 2014, the system average for overtime was 2.1 percent, a slight increase from the FY 2013 

level. Meanwhile, average time on position was 4 hours and 10 minutes, a two-minute increase over FY 2013.

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

responsibilities when senior controllers retire.
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 13

13

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

losses (blue bar) and new hires (green bar) by year through FY 2024. 

Figures for FY 2014 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 the impacts of 

sequestration, the FAA ended FY 2014 approximately 150 controllers below the FY 2014 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 2015 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.
14 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

The FAA uses many

metrics to manage 

its facilities.

RETIREMENTS TRAINEES STAFFING

RANGES

TIME ON POSITION OVERTIME TRAFFIC

FIELD INPUT SIMULATORS AND 

INSTRUCTORS

PRODUCTIVE 

TIME
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 15

15

STAFFING RANGES

Each of the FAA’s 315 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 and 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 validated 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 

years 2000 to 2014. If any annual point falls outside +/- 5 percent of the 2000 to 2014 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 2015 staffing ranges for certified controllers are published by facility in the Appendixes 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.

Figure 3.2: 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 Controller 

Staffing

Facility X Staffing

High

Low

Characteristics/Drivers of Low Staffing Levels

• Reduced controller lost time

• Greater use of overtime

• Increase in traffic volumes

• Increase in hours of operation

• Lower number of position-qualified controllers

• Lower number of advance hire trainees
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 17

17

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.

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.
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 19

19
20 | 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.

Figure 3.4: Air Traffic Control Position and Facility Overview

Airport Trafc 

Control Tower 

(ATCT)

Airport Surface Terminal Departure En Route/

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, 

Departure Controller

Assigns headings 

and altitudes to 

departure aircraft. 

Hands off aircraft to 

the En Route Radar 

Controller.

Flight Data - Radar

Issues IFR ight plan 

clearances to aircraft 

at satellite airports, 

coordinates releases 

Radar Con

Ensures th

separation 

orderly ow 

aircraft thro

Route cent

airspace (in

oceanic air

Radar Ass

Assists the 

Controller.

RdA

Terminal Radar 

Approach Control 

(TRACON)

Air Route T

Control Ce

(ARTCC)

Push back, taxi and takeoff

Ascent

Cruise 

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.

TERMINAL RADAR

APPROACH CONTROL

(TRACON)

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.

AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC

CONTROL CENTER (ARTCC)

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.
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 21

21

/Oceanic Terminal Arrival Airport Surface

Airport Trafc 

Control Tower 

(ATCT)

ntroller

e safe 

 and 

w of 

ough En 

ter 

ncludes 

rspace).

sociate

e Radar 

it

Arrival Controller

Assigns headings and 

altitudes to arrival 

aircraft to establish 

aircraft on nal 

approach course.

Local Controller

Issues landing 

clearances, 

maintains 

prescribed 

separation between 

arrivals, provides 

arrival aircraft with 

latest weather/eld 

conditions.

Ground Controller

Issues taxi 

Trafc 

enter 

Terminal Radar 

Approach Control 

(TRACON)

Cruise

Descent and approach Landing and taxi to gate

AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC

CONTROL CENTER (ARTCC)

Radar Associate (Flight Data)

Supports the Center Radar Controller by 

handling flight data.

TERMINAL RADAR

APPROACH CONTROL

(TRACON)

Arrival Controller

Assigns headings and altitudes to 

arrival aircraft to establish aircraft on final 

approach course.

AIRPORT TRAFFIC CONTROL

TOWER (ATCT)

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.
22 | 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 model 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.
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 23

23

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.

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.
24 | 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 decombined 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.

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.
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 25

25

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 onesize-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 the committee’s judgment, the efficacy of the entire staffing process needs to be judged by the extent to which efforts 

result in the right staffing at all of the FAA’s air traffic facilities. Thus, the extent to which subsequent staffing plans governing 

the hiring, training and transfer of controllers are properly executed must be considered in addition to the specific model 

used in generating the staffing standards or the correctness of the staffing ranges.

In September 2010, the National Academy of Sciences completed a review at the FAA’s request of MITRE’s workload 

modeling capabilities. The review concluded that “the model is superior to past models because it takes into account 

traffic complexity when estimating task load.” It recommended “obtaining more operational and experimental data on task 

performance, however, to establish and validate many key model assumptions, relationships and parameters.” 

During 2013, the FAA continued its work with MITRE to address the 2010 National Academy of Sciences recommendations. 

One recommendation was that MITRE observes controllers in the field. In response to this recommendation, MITRE 

collaborated with the FAA and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) to develop a plan to evaluate the 

En Route workload model. The evaluation sought to validate the model by ensuring it covers tasks that are the major 

drivers of workload, quantifies task performance times, and determines task scheduling distributions. The evaluation 

consisted of two components: field observations and laboratory human-in-the-loop (HITL) experiments. The goals of 

the evaluation were to assess model task coverage across facilities, evaluate task performance times and distributions, 

estimate position-to-traffic thresholds, and calibrate a task time development approach for new tasks. These tasks were 

not completed and presented in time for the July 2014 review mentioned in the paragraphs below.

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

consisted of academicians, consultants and a current NATCA controller as well as retired air traffic controllers. Members 

have expertise in ATC and management, human factors, aviation safety, fatigue and sleep research, workforce planning, 

staffing models, aviation demand and management, public policy, economics, and budgeting. 

The following is a quote from the National Academy of Sciences report: “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.” The FAA is in the process of consulting with the National Academy of Sciences to review 

and gain further understanding of the academy’s specific recommendations.
26 | 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 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:

Schedule 

Generation

Day of 

Operation

Specify 

Demand

Generate Shift 

Start Times

Create Shift 

Lines

Bidding

LONG 

TERM

MID 

TERM

SHORT 

TERM
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 27

27

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.

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 diagram below 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. 
28 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

In the diagram below, 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. 

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?” 
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 29

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.
30 | 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 
Chapter 3: Staffing Requirements | 31

31

TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES

In 2014, the FAA made great progress toward completing the foundational phase of the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System (NextGen). Through En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM), the FAA upgraded automation capabilities in 

20 planned En Route centers. In Terminal facilities, the FAA is upgrading its automation platform through the Terminal 

Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR) program. In March 2014, the FAA completed the installation of 634 

radios to serve as ground infrastructure for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). 

Meanwhile, the FAA continues to move ahead with several other key NextGen programs including Data Communications 

(Data Comm), NAS Voice System, and Time Based Flow Management (TBFM).

While there are many NextGen technologies on the horizon, ERAM and Data Comm are believed to have to most impact 

on air traffic controller productivity in the near term.

ERAM technology is foundational to NextGen. Upgrading the 1970s automation platform will advance the transition from 

a ground-based system of air traffic control to a satellite-based system of air traffic management. ERAM technology 

processes flight radar data, provides communications and generates display data for air traffic controllers. Future ERAM 

enhancements could also improve controller productivity, but the scope and precise impact of those enhancements 

are still under development. 

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 will enable 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 will reduce 

the talk time between controllers and pilots, decreasing the potential for errors in voice communication while enabling 

controllers to handle more traffic. 

Data Comm departure clearance trials at Memphis and Newark airports are coming along well. Each site is using Data 

Comm 24 hours a day, seven days a week to conduct as many as 80 operations a day. This year, the FAA starts key 

site testing at Salt Lake Tower, and two control towers in Houston. The FAA is on schedule for deployment at 56 airports 

starting in 2016, which is based on “challenge” implementation dates agreed to with the NextGen Advisory Committee 

(NAC), and at all of its En Route control centers starting in 2019.

As part of the NAC prioritization effort, the FAA agreed to concentrate its efforts on four NextGen priorities: (1) increasing 

the use of Performance Based (or satellite-based) Navigation, (2) making multiple runway operations more efficient, (3) 

improving surface operations and (4) 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. As with ERAM, 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. 
Chapter 4: Losses Plan

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

I

n total, the FAA expects to lose almost 1,400 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 2015 through 

FY 2024.

Table 4.1: Controller Loss Summary

Loss Category Losses: 2015 – 2024

Retirements 4,394

Resignations, Removals and Deaths 423

Developmental Attrition 961

Promotions/Transfers 3,016

Academy Attrition 1,384

Total 10,178
Chapter 4: Losses Plan | 33

33

ACTUAL CONTROLLER RETIREMENTS

Fiscal year 2007 was correctly projected to be a peak year for retirements of controllers hired in the early 1980s. The longanticipated retirement wave has passed, and annual retirements are expected to decline for the next ten years.
34 | 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 1,000 controllers because the majority of the controllers hired 

shortly after the 1981 strike have already retired and been replaced.

The 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.
Chapter 4: Losses Plan | 35

35

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 2014 and those projected 

to become retirement eligible each fiscal year through FY 2024. Agency projections show that an additional 373 controllers 

will become eligible to retire in FY 2015. The number of retirement eligible controllers has been in decline in recent years 

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. 
36 | 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 2014, 13.3 percent of controllers who first 

became eligible actually retired. This is comparable to the 13.2 percent in last year’s plan.

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.
Chapter 4: Losses Plan | 37

37

CONTROLLER LOSSES DUE TO RETIREMENTS

For the current plan, the agency incorporated FY 2014 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.
38 | 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

2014* 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

47 41 42 42 42 42 42 43 43 43 43

* Actual

DEVELOPMENTAL ATTRITION

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

agency has incorporated historical developmental attrition rates into the latest FAA forecasts. Reduced hiring due to 

sequestration in previous years has caused the need for a small hiring surge in FY 2015 and FY 2016. Therefore, this plan 

incorporates a projected increase in developmental attrition for FY 2016 through FY 2018.

Table 4.3: Developmental Attrition

2014* 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

71 84 152 138 115 95 87 80 74 69 67

* Actual

ACADEMY ATTRITION

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

rates and are shown in Table 4.4. Reduced hiring due to sequestration in previous years has caused the need for a small 

hiring surge in FY 2015 and FY 2016. Therefore, this plan incorporates a projected increase in Academy attrition for FY 

2015 and FY 2016.

Table 4.4: Academy Attrition

2014* 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

150 253 204 150 141 129 117 106 97 93 94

* Actual
Chapter 4: Losses Plan | 39

39

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 162 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 213 in 2017 and slightly fall in future years as seen in Figure 4.6. 
40 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

TOTAL CONTROLLER LOSSES

The FAA projects a total loss of 10,178 controllers over the next 10 years. Should losses outpace projections for FY 2015, 

the FAA will hire additional controllers to reach the end-of-year goal of 14,717 air traffic controllers on board.
Chapter 4: Losses Plan | 41

41
42 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

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 controller hiring process, the FAA will attract and recruit a 

sufficient number of applicants to achieve this hiring plan.

Chapter 5: Hiring Plan
Chapter 5: Hiring Plan | 43

43

CONTROLLER HIRING PROFILE

The controller hiring profile is shown in Figure 5.1. Despite the effects of sequestration during the first three months of FY 

2014 during which the FAA was under a hiring freeze, the FAA was able to hire 1,112 of the planned 1,286 controllers in 

FY 2014. The difference between planned and actual hiring in FY 2014, as well as a significant remaining backlog of new 

hires needed from FY 2013, is expected to be addressed over the next two fiscal years, raising hiring projections in those 

years relative to last year’s plan. The number of controllers projected to be hired through FY 2024 is 10,241.

Due to the effects of sequestration, the FAA only hired 554 controllers in FY 2013 and 

1,112 in FY 2014.
44 | 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. 

While the FAA strives to keep trainees 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 2024. The 

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

While Terminal facilities are showing a decline through 2024, 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.
Chapter 5: Hiring Plan | 45

45

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 post-strike 

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.
46 | 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.
Chapter 6: Hiring Process | 47

47

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.

• 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 revised the air traffic control hiring process. The changes allowed the FAA to more efficiently compare 

applicants across previously used hiring sources to select those candidates most likely to succeed as air traffic control 

specialists. Key changes 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 stated that it would conduct a two-track announcement process for hiring air traffic control 

specialists for the year. The first track includes 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 targets 

candidates without operational air traffic control experience.

Chapter 6: Hiring Process
Chapter 7: Training

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

One of the primary goals of the FAA’s technical training and development programs is to ensure that our air traffic 

controllers have all the necessary skills and abilities to perform 

their jobs effectively and maintain the safety of the NAS.

The FAA’s technical training framework is designed to provide controllers with training to meet the challenges of today and 

prepare them for the next advancements of air traffic management.

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 under the same leadership 

structure 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.

FAA’S CALL TO ACTION

The FAA previously reported on its independent review of the selection, assignment and training of air traffic control 

specialists (see http://1.usa.gov/IRP_Release) as part of a nationwide Call to Action in 2011 on air traffic control safety 

and professionalism. About a third of the Independent Review Panel’s (IRP) 49 recommendations dealt with the selection 

and placement of air traffic control specialists. The rest covered improvements to professionalism, on-the-job training 

instruction, learning technologies, record-keeping, and curriculum design. The FAA continues to work on projects that 

adopt the panel’s recommendations.

The agency has updated training courses to support cumulative grading, in which students are assessed at multiple 

points in training, with new training advancement decision points, so that students underperforming in training are either 

provided remedial training or are released from the agency. The revamped process increases staffing flexibility for the 

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

THE TRAINING PROCESS

Training begins at the FAA Academy, where students gain foundational air traffic control knowledge through classroom 

and simulation training. Later, at field facilities, they receive additional classroom and simulation training and then on-the 

job training to become certified professional controllers (CPC). All controllers are assigned periodic proficiency training, in 

the form of recurrent training or other supplemental training.

The FAA is adopting an outcome-based approach to the design and development of training, based on one of the 

recommendations from the IRP. The outcome-based approach 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. The newer approach includes mapping curriculum to job tasks, knowledge, skills and training 

methods. The techniques apply to new course development, redesigns and updates. 
Chapter 7: Training | 49

49

FAA ACADEMY TRAINING

The FAA Academy trains new controllers using lecture, computer-based instruction, and simulation with a range of 

fidelity. The academy lays the foundation for controller development by teaching common, fundamental air traffic control 

procedures that are used throughout the country.

FAA FACILITY TRAINING

After graduating from the FAA Academy, developmental controllers begin facility training in the classroom, where they 

learn facility-specific rules and procedures. Often, these rules and procedures are practiced in simulation. 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 uses simulation to help compress the training timeline while also improving the 

students’ learning experience and reducing training costs.

After classroom and simulation training have been completed, developmental controllers begin on-the-job training on 

operational positions. This training is conducted by CPCs who observe and instruct developmental controllers working 

the control position. Once they are certified on control positions, developmental controllers often work independently on 

those positions under the direction of a supervisor to gain experience and to supplement staffing.

The Flight Deck Training (FDT) program is supplemental training designed for current controllers to improve understanding 

and communications between controllers and pilots. During 2014, the program accomplished over 2,900 FDT flights.

RECURRENT TRAINING

In 2012, the FAA initiated recurrent training to enhance controller proficiency. The recurrent training program is administered 

annually as a combination of classroom and computer-based instruction for air traffic controllers that deliver 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, predetermined topics, recurrent training delivers timely and 

directly relevant safety training based on safety trends and lessons learned from safety data and analysis. Recurrent training 

is developed in collaboration with subject matter experts from the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. 

Most recently, the FAA initiated a multi-year, three-step program to revise and update its training courses for on-the-jobtraining 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.

INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS

To improve the performance and reliability of the eLearning Management System (eLMS) across the Air Traffic Organization 

(ATO), the FAA set up a Content Delivery Network (CDN) on Computer Based Instruction (CBI) training platforms. This 

system delivers replacement CBI hard drives with all qualified eLMS course content to air traffic facilities. The CDN is 

basically a network that places the eLMS content on a distributor at the site so the content is viewed from a local area 

network instead of downloading the content every time it’s viewed. Approximately 150 air traffic sites have the CDN 

solution installed, and there are plans to deploy the CDN solution to the remaining Air Traffic sites in 2015. Sites with the 

CDN configuration have the ability to view more robust training typically associated with multimedia and simulation.
50 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

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 En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) and Terminal Automation 

Modernization and Replacement (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.

Table 7.1 shows the FAA’s training targets by facility type and actual training times through the end of FY 2014 for certified 

air traffic controllers from the fiscal year hiring classes of 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. More than 82 percent of controllers 

in hiring classes since 2008 have completed training.

Given the 1.5- to 3-year targeted training times for new Terminal and En Route controllers, Table 7.1 reflects actual training 

behavior for controllers who started in FY 2007 to FY 2010. In addition, the FAA continues to monitor the pace of new 

hires from more recent hiring classes (i.e., 2011-2014). The FAA will report actual training times for these classes after 

completion rates reach 90 percent.

Table 7.1: Years to Certify

Facility Type FAA Goal FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010

Terminal 4 – 6 1.5 1.87 2.05 2.37 2.05

Terminal 7 – 9 2.0 1.92 2.26 2.48 2.23

Terminal 10 – 12 2.5 2.05 2.30 2.56 2.22

En Route 3.0 2.57 2.73 2.98 2.93

Note: More recent hiring classes (FY 2011 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.

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. The ultimate goal of the training program is for the controller to 

achieve certification on all positions at a facility and attain CPC status while maintaining the safety of the NAS.

PREPARING FOR NEXTGEN

The Office of Safety and Technical Training provides critical input to support implementation of NextGen.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. 

In 2013, the Technical Training office worked with data from NextGen Human Factors to estimate how much training would 

be affected by NextGen technologies being introduced to the workforce in the mid-term range. Using the Human Factors’ 

Strategic Training Needs Assessment (STNA), the FAA assessed what training development needs were likely to be.
Chapter 7: Training | 51

51

Examples of NextGen training efforts include Time Based Flow Management (TBFM), ERAM and Automatic Dependent 

Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B).

• The TBFM system enhances efficiency and improves traffic flow by leveraging the capabilities of the Traffic Management 

Advisor (TMA) decision support tool. Although some form of TBFM has been in the field for many years, a national 

training program was never developed. The Technical Training office is now filling the training gap with a series of courses 

for the Web and classroom to be implemented as supplemental or refresher training.

• Multiple courses covering ERAM have been implemented to support transition of En Route facilities to this new technology. 

Courses include workforce training, refresher training, supplemental training and cadre training for instructors who 

deliver training in the field. These various courses enable a consistent yet flexible delivery of ERAM training as facilities 

cycle through the phases of system implementation.

• ADS-B training combines instructor-led training with hands-on performance verification on the actual equipment. This 

training covers ADS-B, Fused Mode and associated new functionality in the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement 

System (STARS).
Chapter 8: Funding Status

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

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

certify. The average cost of a developmental in FY 2015 is projected to be $91,279.

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

developmentals by year through 2024. 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.
Appendix A: En Route Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 53

53

The Appendix below presents controller staffing ranges, by facility, for En Route air traffic control facilities for FY 2015. 

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.

Appendix A: En Route Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

ZAB Albuquerque ARTCC 166 1 27 194 161 197

ZAN Anchorage ARTCC 70 7 19 96 84 103

ZAU Chicago ARTCC 318 16 38 372 274 335

ZBW Boston ARTCC 212 7 43 262 186 228

ZDC Washington ARTCC 270 14 54 338 263 322

ZDV Denver ARTCC 243 16 43 302 227 277

ZFW Fort Worth ARTCC 254 19 33 306 251 306

ZHU Houston ARTCC 224 12 27 263 237 290

ZID Indianapolis ARTCC 269 12 38 319 245 300

ZJX Jacksonville ARTCC 276 6 19 301 217 266

ZKC Kansas City ARTCC 199 15 52 266 204 249

ZLA Los Angeles ARTCC 219 17 43 279 209 256

ZLC Salt Lake City ARTCC 156 1 13 170 138 169

ZMA Miami ARTCC 225 8 22 255 214 262

ZME Memphis ARTCC 242 8 33 283 223 273

ZMP Minneapolis ARTCC 226 9 44 279 223 272

ZNY New York ARTCC 239 10 64 313 244 298

ZOA Oakland ARTCC 171 17 65 253 171 209

ZOB Cleveland ARTCC 317 8 41 366 268 327

ZSE Seattle ARTCC 128 6 40 174 129 157

ZSU San Juan ARTCC 40 6 5 51 44 54

ZTL Atlanta ARTCC 343 11 22 376 311 380

ZUA Guam ARTCC 16 0 0 16 14 17

EN ROUTE TOTAL 4,823 226 785 5,834 4,537 5,547 

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH
54 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

The Appendix below presents controller staffing ranges, by facility, for Terminal air traffic control facilities for FY 2015. 

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.

A11 Anchorage TRACON 14 6 9 29 20 24

A80 Atlanta TRACON 76 13 0 89 82 100

A90 Boston TRACON 57 2 0 59 49 60

ABE Allentown Tower 19 5 5 29 22 27

ABI Abilene Tower 15 0 6 21 16 20

ABQ Albuquerque Tower 27 6 3 36 22 26

ACK Nantucket Tower 9 0 2 11 9 11

ACT Waco Tower 14 2 6 22 16 20

ACY Atlantic City Tower 17 4 6 27 20 24

ADS Addison Tower 11 1 0 12 9 11

ADW Andrews Tower 14 0 2 16 11 14

AFW Alliance Tower 15 0 1 16 13 16

AGC Allegheny Tower 14 1 3 18 9 11

AGS Augusta Tower 13 0 6 19 13 15

ALB Albany Tower 14 3 5 22 20 24

ALO Waterloo Tower 8 0 7 15 11 13

AMA Amarillo Tower 16 1 6 23 15 18

ANC Anchorage Tower 21 3 6 30 21 26

APA Centennial Tower 16 4 3 23 18 22

APC Napa Tower 6 0 2 8 6 7

ARB Ann Arbor Tower 7 0 1 8 8 10
Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 55

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

ARR Aurora Tower 9 1 2 12 8 10

ASE Aspen Tower 10 0 7 17 11 13

ATL Atlanta Tower 45 11 0 56 43 52

AUS Austin Tower 28 14 0 42 31 37

AVL Asheville Tower 11 0 6 17 13 16

AVP Wilkes-Barre Tower 16 0 3 19 16 20

AZO Kalamazoo Tower 12 1 4 17 14 17

BDL Bradley Tower 15 1 3 19 10 13

BED Hanscom Tower 15 0 1 16 11 13

BFI Boeing Tower 18 5 3 26 14 17

BFL Bakersfield Tower 16 1 9 26 17 21

BGM Binghamton Tower 13 0 2 15 11 13

BGR Bangor Tower 19 0 1 20 15 19

BHM Birmingham Tower 21 2 3 26 22 26

BIL Billings Tower 16 0 3 19 16 19

BIS Bismarck Tower 7 0 5 12 13 15

BJC Broomfield Tower 12 1 0 13 8 10

BNA Nashville Tower 26 10 3 39 32 40

BOI Boise Tower 25 3 5 33 20 25

BOS Boston Tower 28 8 0 36 27 33

BPT Beaumont Tower 9 0 1 10 9 11

BTR Baton Rouge Tower 12 3 5 20 15 18

BTV Burlington Tower 14 2 6 22 16 19

BUF Buffalo Tower 24 1 8 33 24 29

BUR Burbank Tower 15 4 0 19 14 17

BWI Baltimore Tower 27 3 3 33 19 24

C90 Chicago TRACON 74 19 0 93 80 98

CAE Columbia Tower 23 0 1 24 18 21

CAK Akron-Canton Tower 23 1 3 27 16 20

CCR Concord Tower 8 0 0 8 8 10

CDW Caldwell Tower 11 0 0 11 8 9

CHA Chattanooga Tower 14 3 5 22 16 19
56 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

CHS Charleston Tower 23 0 3 26 18 23

CID Cedar Rapids Tower 15 0 3 18 13 16

CKB Clarksburg Tower 17 0 2 19 13 16

CLE Cleveland Tower 43 5 6 54 35 43

CLT Charlotte Tower 62 24 2 88 74 90

CMA Camarillo Tower 11 2 2 15 9 10

CMH Columbus Tower 38 8 1 47 36 45

CMI Champaign Tower 11 0 5 16 13 16

CNO Chino Tower 10 3 2 15 9 11

COS Colorado Springs Tower 24 6 3 33 22 26

CPR Casper Tower 11 0 3 14 11 13

CPS Downtown Tower 12 0 1 13 9 11

CRP Corpus Christi Tower 26 6 5 37 28 34

CRQ Palomar Tower 14 0 2 16 9 11

CRW Charleston Tower 21 2 5 28 17 21

CSG Columbus Tower 7 0 0 7 4 5

CVG Cincinnati Tower 48 1 0 49 34 41

D01 Denver TRACON 55 13 0 68 65 80

D10 Dallas-Fort Worth TRACON 55 22 0 77 77 94

D21 Detroit TRACON 41 16 0 57 48 59

DAB Daytona Beach Tower 37 13 8 58 47 57

DAL Dallas Love Tower 24 3 1 28 17 21

DAY Dayton Tower 17 0 0 17 12 14

DCA Washington National Tower 21 9 4 34 23 28

DEN Denver Tower 36 5 0 41 34 42

DFW DFW Tower 48 4 0 52 46 57

DLH Duluth Tower 15 1 7 23 17 21

DPA Dupage Tower 11 2 1 14 9 12

DSM Des Moines Tower 15 5 6 26 17 21

DTW Detroit Tower 33 0 0 33 29 35

DVT Deer Valley Tower 17 2 1 20 14 18

DWH Hooks Tower 17 0 0 17 11 13
Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 57

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

E10 High Desert TRACON 22 1 4 27 23 29

ELM Elmira Tower 13 0 2 15 10 12

ELP El Paso Tower 16 2 6 24 18 22

EMT El Monte Tower 9 1 1 11 8 10

ERI Erie Tower 16 1 5 22 11 14

EUG Eugene Tower 10 9 4 23 16 20

EVV Evansville Tower 17 0 2 19 14 17

EWR Newark Tower 27 11 0 38 28 34

F11 Central Florida TRACON 37 12 0 49 41 50

FAI Fairbanks Tower 17 1 5 23 18 22

FAR Fargo Tower 17 3 2 22 15 18

FAT Fresno Tower 17 6 6 29 20 25

FAY Fayetteville Tower 18 6 2 26 19 23

FCM Flying Cloud Tower 11 0 0 11 7 9

FFZ Falcon Tower 13 0 2 15 12 15

FLL Fort Lauderdale Tower 27 2 3 32 20 24

FLO Florence Tower 10 1 3 14 10 12

FNT Flint Tower 15 1 3 19 11 14

FPR St Lucie Tower 9 2 4 15 10 12

FRG Farmingdale Tower 13 1 3 17 12 15

FSD Sioux Falls Tower 16 1 1 18 14 17

FSM Fort Smith Tower 20 1 2 23 20 24

FTW Meacham Tower 14 1 3 18 12 14

FWA Fort Wayne Tower 17 1 4 22 16 19

FXE Fort Lauderdale 15 1 6 22 13 15

GCN Grand Canyon Tower 8 1 1 10 8 10

GEG Spokane Tower 22 2 3 27 20 24

GFK Grand Forks Tower 20 3 3 26 18 22

GGG Longview Tower 13 0 4 17 15 18

GPT Gulfport Tower 12 2 7 21 13 16

GRB Green Bay Tower 21 0 0 21 16 19

GRR Grand Rapids Tower 18 0 4 22 17 20
58 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

GSO Greensboro Tower 25 2 6 33 21 26

GSP Greer Tower 12 2 7 21 17 20

GTF Great Falls Tower 10 1 5 16 12 15

HCF Honolulu Control Facility 72 11 13 96 73 89

HEF Manassas Tower 9 1 4 14 8 10

HIO Hillsboro Tower 16 1 2 19 12 14

HLN Helena Tower 8 0 3 11 7 9

HOU Hobby Tower 24 0 0 24 17 21

HPN Westchester Tower 14 0 4 18 11 14

HSV Huntsville Tower 15 0 4 19 14 17

HTS Huntington Tower 19 0 1 20 12 15

HUF Terre Haute Tower 15 1 7 23 13 16

HWD Hayward Tower 9 1 2 12 7 9

I90 Houston TRACON 69 20 0 89 74 90

IAD Dulles Tower 32 1 4 37 25 31

IAH Houston Intercontinental Tower 40 2 0 42 29 36

ICT Wichita Tower 28 8 1 37 26 32

ILG Wilmington Tower 11 1 3 15 7 9

ILM Wilmington Tower 16 2 3 21 15 19

IND Indianapolis Tower 37 6 3 46 32 40

ISP Islip Tower 12 0 6 18 10 12

ITO Hilo Tower 13 1 4 18 12 14

JAN Jackson Tower 12 0 3 15 13 16

JAX Jacksonville Tower 24 11 7 42 37 46

JFK Kennedy Tower 26 7 3 36 28 35

JNU Juneau Tower 9 0 3 12 9 12

K90 Cape TRACON 22 2 1 25 19 24

L30 Las Vegas TRACON 36 15 1 52 40 49

LAF Lafayette Tower 8 2 1 11 7 9

LAN Lansing Tower 18 1 5 24 16 19

LAS Las Vegas Tower 37 10 0 47 31 38

LAX Los Angeles Tower 38 11 0 49 38 46
Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 59

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

LBB Lubbock Tower 15 1 5 21 15 18

LCH Lake Charles Tower 11 0 5 16 12 15

LEX Lexington Tower 20 3 4 27 18 22

LFT Lafayette Tower 14 0 5 19 15 18

LGA La Guardia Tower 29 5 2 36 26 32

LGB Long Beach Tower 24 0 0 24 16 20

LIT Little Rock Tower 23 5 4 32 22 27

LNK Lincoln Tower 10 0 0 10 8 9

LOU Bowman Tower 9 0 2 11 8 9

LVK Livermore Tower 9 4 1 14 8 10

M03 Memphis TRACON 27 7 7 41 30 37

M98 Minneapolis TRACON 47 6 0 53 49 59

MAF Midland Tower 15 0 6 21 18 21

MBS Saginaw Tower 14 2 2 18 10 13

MCI Kansas City Tower 31 3 1 35 30 37

MCO Orlando Tower 24 4 1 29 21 26

MDT Harrisburg Tower 23 1 8 32 20 24

MDW Midway Tower 22 6 0 28 20 24

MEM Memphis Tower 25 1 4 30 20 24

MFD Mansfield Tower 12 1 4 17 11 13

MGM Montgomery Tower 12 7 4 23 16 20

MHT Manchester Tower 18 0 1 19 10 12

MIA Miami Tower 68 18 3 89 78 95

MIC Crystal Tower 11 0 0 11 8 10

MKC Downtown Tower 12 1 3 16 10 12

MKE Milwaukee Tower 40 9 3 52 31 38

MKG Muskegon Tower 14 0 1 15 12 15

MLI Quad City Tower 6 1 9 16 15 18

MLU Monroe Tower 9 1 4 14 11 13

MMU Morristown Tower 11 0 0 11 7 9

MOB Mobile Tower 19 1 3 23 18 23

MRI Merrill Tower 10 2 1 13 9 11
60 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

MRY Monterey Tower 8 0 1 9 6 7

MSN Madison Tower 19 4 0 23 16 20

MSP Minneapolis Tower 31 3 0 34 30 37

MSY New Orleans Tower 23 6 0 29 30 37

MWH Grant County Tower 9 1 5 15 13 16

MYF Montgomery Tower 10 1 6 17 10 12

MYR Myrtle Beach Tower 13 3 9 25 22 27

N90 New York TRACON 150 18 35 203 177 217

NCT Northern California TRACON 146 27 10 183 152 186

NEW Lakefront Tower 8 0 0 8 7 8

NMM Meridian TRACON 8 0 3 11 11 14

OAK Oakland Tower 24 4 0 28 17 21

OGG Maui Tower 10 1 4 15 8 10

OKC Oklahoma City Tower 32 2 5 39 26 32

OMA Eppley Tower 16 0 0 16 10 12

ONT Ontario Tower 15 0 3 18 10 12

ORD Chicago O'Hare Tower 48 21 0 69 59 72

ORF Norfolk Tower 22 6 8 36 25 31

ORL Orlando Executive Tower 10 0 2 12 9 11

P31 Pensacola TRACON 27 2 2 31 28 35

P50 Phoenix TRACON 51 10 0 61 52 64

P80 Portland TRACON 24 5 4 33 22 27

PAE Paine Tower 10 2 2 14 9 10

PAO Palo Alto Tower 7 1 1 9 9 11

PBI Palm Beach Tower 29 12 9 50 33 41

PCT Potomac TRACON 143 29 9 181 137 167

PDK DeKalb-Peachtree Tower 18 4 0 22 12 14

PDX Portland Tower 23 8 2 33 18 22

PHF Patrick Henry Tower 11 1 4 16 8 10

PHL Philadelphia Tower 77 12 0 89 65 79

PHX Phoenix Tower 30 3 0 33 27 33

PIA Peoria Tower 11 1 6 18 15 18
Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 61

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

PIE St Petersburg Tower 13 0 3 16 9 11

PIT Pittsburgh Tower 39 7 0 46 32 39

PNE Northeast Philadelphia Tower 8 1 4 13 7 9

PNS Pensacola Tower 11 1 1 13 10 12

POC Brackett Tower 10 1 0 11 8 10

POU Poughkeepsie Tower 10 0 2 12 7 9

PRC Prescott Tower 12 1 3 16 12 15

PSC Pasco Tower 13 1 2 16 13 16

PSP Palm Springs Tower 7 1 5 13 8 10

PTK Pontiac Tower 13 0 1 14 9 11

PUB Pueblo Tower 12 0 3 15 11 14

PVD Providence Tower 24 1 4 29 23 28

PWK Chicago Executive Tower 12 1 1 14 8 10

PWM Portland Tower 19 1 5 25 16 20

R90 Omaha TRACON 19 4 0 23 17 21

RDG Reading Tower 15 0 2 17 15 18

RDU Raleigh-Durham Tower 32 7 0 39 34 42

RFD Rockford Tower 20 2 3 25 16 20

RHV Reid-Hillview Tower 10 2 0 12 9 11

RIC Richmond Tower 12 1 8 21 10 13

RNO Reno Tower 14 1 1 16 11 13

ROA Roanoke Tower 23 2 8 33 18 22

ROC Rochester Tower 27 1 3 31 18 22

ROW Roswell Tower 10 1 4 15 12 14

RST Rochester Tower 15 0 1 16 11 14

RSW Fort Myers Tower 23 5 5 33 24 29

RVS Riverside Tower 14 0 0 14 9 10

S46 Seattle TRACON 42 12 0 54 41 50

S56 Salt Lake City TRACON 32 11 6 49 36 44

SAN San Diego Tower 22 3 0 25 18 22

SAT San Antonio Tower 34 14 1 49 38 47

SAV Savannah Tower 20 1 4 25 19 24
62 | A Plan for the Future: 10-Year Strategy for the Air Traffic Control Workforce

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges

SBA Santa Barbara Tower 24 10 0 34 22 26

SBN South Bend Tower 13 1 8 22 18 21

SCK Stockton Tower 7 0 3 10 7 8

SCT Southern California TRACON 214 27 3 244 192 235

SDF Standiford Tower 33 8 6 47 34 41

SDL Scottsdale Tower 8 4 3 15 9 11

SEA Seattle Tower 27 0 1 28 23 28

SEE Gillespie Tower 10 1 2 13 11 13

SFB Sanford Tower 16 4 1 21 15 18

SFO San Francisco Tower 26 6 0 32 28 34

SGF Springfield Tower 26 1 3 30 20 25

SHV Shreveport Tower 14 0 9 23 18 22

SJC San Jose Tower 14 0 0 14 10 13

SJU San Juan Tower 12 2 8 22 12 15

SLC Salt Lake City Tower 29 4 0 33 24 29

SMF Sacramento Tower 14 0 3 17 10 12

SMO Santa Monica Tower 10 2 1 13 8 10

SNA John Wayne Tower 25 3 0 28 19 23

SPI Springfield Tower 8 0 6 14 10 13

SRQ Sarasota Tower 11 1 4 16 10 12

STL St Louis Tower 20 2 3 25 14 17

STP St Paul Tower 13 0 0 13 8 10

STS Sonoma Tower 7 1 2 10 7 8

STT St Thomas Tower 8 1 2 11 7 9

SUS Spirit Tower 10 0 3 13 9 11

SUX Sioux Gateway Tower 11 0 5 16 9 11

SYR Syracuse Tower 20 0 7 27 17 21

T75 St Louis TRACON 30 0 1 31 25 31

TEB Teterboro Tower 16 5 4 25 14 17

TLH Tallahassee Tower 16 3 3 22 14 18

TMB Tamiami Tower 16 0 0 16 14 17

TOA Torrance Tower 9 2 0 11 8 10
Appendix B: Terminal Facility Controller Staffing Ranges | 63

ACTUAL ON BOARD AS OF 09/20/14 STAFFING RANGES

ID FACILITY NAME CPC CPC-IT DEVELOPMENTAL TOTAL LOW HIGH

TOL Toledo Tower 16 2 3 21 16 20

TPA Tampa Tower 45 7 2 54 45 54

TRI Tri-Cities Tower 15 1 4 20 14 17

TUL Tulsa Tower 28 0 6 34 22 27

TUS Tucson Tower 13 1 5 19 11 14

TVC Traverse City Tower 8 0 1 9 8 10

TWF Twin Falls Tower 6 1 2 9 7 8

TYS Knoxville Tower 18 4 7 29 22 26

U90 Tucson TRACON 16 3 1 20 15 18

VGT North Las Vegas Tower 6 7 1 14 9 11

VNY Van Nuys Tower 18 5 2 25 17 20

VRB Vero Beach Tower 13 0 2 15 10 13

Y90 Yankee TRACON 18 5 6 29 18 21

YIP Willow Run Tower 12 0 0 12 10 12

YNG Youngstown Tower 16 1 1 18 22 26

TERMINAL TOTAL 6,369 974 882 8,225 6,118 7,477 

EN ROUTE TOTAL 4,823 226 785 5,834 4,537 5,547 

TERMINAL TOTAL 6,369 974 882 8,225 6,118 7,477 

GRAND TOTAL 11,192 1,200 1,667 14,059 10,655 13,024 
800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591 2015-ABA-037 • Produced by FAA Communications