GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

May 17, 2006 

The Honorable Ken Calvert 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics 

Committee on Science 

House of Representatives 

Subject: Responses to Questions for the Record; Hearing on The Future of Air 

Traffic Control: The R&D Agenda 

Dear Chairman Calvert: 

This letter responds to your April 26, 2006, request that we address questions 

submitted for the record by Members of the Subcommittee related to the March 29, 

2006, hearing entitled The Future of Air Traffic Control: The R&D Agenda. Our 

answers to your questions are attached. Our responses are based on our previous 

and ongoing work and our knowledge of the areas addressed by the questions. We 

prepared our responses during May 2006 in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. Because our responses are based in large part on 

previously issued products for which we sought and incorporated agency comments, 

we did not seek agency comments on our responses to these questions. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Administrator, Federal Aviation 

Administration, and the Director, Joint Planning and Development Office. We will 

make copies available to others on request. This report is also available on GAO’s 

Web site at www.gao.gov. 

If you have any questions or would like to discuss the responses, please contact me at 

(202) 512-2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov. 

Sincerely yours, 

Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D. 

Director 

Physical Infrastructure Issues 

Enclosure – 1 
Enclosure 

Responses to Post-Hearing Questions for the Record 

The Future of Air Traffic Control: The R&D Agenda 

Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics 

Committee on Science 

House of Representatives 

Submitted May 17, 2006 

Questions for Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D., Director 

Physical Infrastructure Issues

Government Accountability Office 

Questions for the Record Submitted by Chairman Ken Calvert

1. Several witnesses stated that maintaining support for JPDO from its 

participating agencies over the long-run was critical. What organizational and 

management changes, if any, do you recommend to enhance long-term support 

of JPDO? 

To date, the Joint Planning and Development Office’s (JPDO) current organizational 

structure appears to facilitate the federal interagency collaboration that is central to 

JPDO’s mission. However, as the transition to the next generation air transportation 

system (NGATS) moves forward, the volume and complexity of the tasks will increase. 

Consequently, it is important for JPDO to define and institutionalize the roles and 

responsibilities of its partner agencies to ensure the long-term support for planning and 

implementing NGATS. The institutionalization of roles and responsibilities is especially 

important since the NGATS effort will extend through eventual changes in agency and 

JPDO leadership. Currently, there is no formal, long-term agreement on the partner 

agencies’ roles and responsibilities in creating NGATS. According to JPDO officials, a 

memorandum of understanding that would define the partner agencies’ relationships was 

being developed as of August 2005, but has not yet been completed. 

Also important to enhancing the long-term support of JPDO are steps to integrate the 

NGATS goals into partner agencies’ budget processes. Currently, JPDO is working with 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establish a process for identifying the 

NGATS as a unified program. We believe that this is a good first step to ensure that 

NGATS moves ahead in a coordinated, coherent manner. 

In addition, one mechanism for enhancing and sustaining federal collaborations is to use 

agencies’ strategic and annual performance plans as tools for establishing 

complementary goals and strategies. However, based on our initial assessment of the 

partner agencies’ strategic plans, we found that only the Department of Transportation 

(DOT), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) have incorporated the NGATS goals into their agencylevel strategic plans. Although we have not completed our review of the partner 

agencies’ strategic plans, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration’s (NOAA) strategic plan, more opportunities exist for integrating the 

2 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

NGATS goals into the partner agencies’ plans and budgets. For example, only NASA’s 

current reauthorization act requires the agency to align its aviation research projects to 

directly support the NGATS goals. This type of congressional action can reinforce 

accountability for the JPDO collaboration by aligning agency goals and strategies with 

those of NGATS and further institutionalize the NGATS goals into the partner agencies’ 

plans. 

3 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Chairman Calvert] 

2. What critical policy decisions must be made by the Senior Policy Committee 

before the JPDO can start down a particular technology and architecture path? 

For example, do decisions need to be made on the degree to which 

responsibility for aircraft can be handed over to automated systems, or whether 

some airplanes will be allowed to fly using “Visual Flight Rules” instead of filing 

a flight plan, or how NGATS will treat commercial aviation vs. general aviation? 

What significant policy issues do you think fall into this category? 

Before the JPDO can start down a particular technology and architecture path, the 

Senior Policy Committee (the Committee) must first approve the budget guidance that 

the JPDO provides to the partner agencies. That document recommends specific 

research initiatives, technologies, and schedules for implementation and deployment. 

For fiscal year 2007, the JPDO’s Integrated Product Teams (IPT) identified a number of 

“Jump Start” initiatives, including putting Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast 

(ADS-B) and System Wide Information Management (SWIM) on the fast track. These 

initiatives were included in agency budget guidance that was approved by the 

Committee. In the future, such decisions will flow from the enterprise architecture. 

JPDO plans to have an early version of the enterprise architecture available by the end of 

this fiscal year, with significant IPT input. 

The policy decisions suggested in the question above are among those that the 

Committee could decide. For example, the Committee could address policy issues 

surrounding how roles and responsibilities for handling increased traffic may shift as a 

result of the increased reliance on automation envisioned in NGATS. Concerning general 

aviation, JPDO officials noted that NGATS has the potential to provide significant 

benefits to this community. However, they said that it is difficult to specify exactly what 

decisions the Committee would have to make concerning general aviation. Officials said

that most of these decisions, when they occur, will be tied to the requirements of the 

enterprise architecture. In any event, it is likely that decisions on concepts and policies 

relating to general aviation would be made in concert among JPDO, the Committee, and 

FAA to address concerns such as visual flight rules vs. instrument flight rules. New 

technologies would require testing or demonstrating for use in the national airspace 

system (NAS). Also, FAA would have to start developing the regulation for 

implementation at the appropriate point so that the regulation would be available at the 

appropriate time. 

4 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Chairman Calvert] 

3. What are your views about the wisdom of having JPDO contract out much of 

the development work for NGATS to a lead systems integrator? What are the 

advantages and disadvantages of bringing in a lead systems integrator for 

NGATS? 

Determining whether using a lead systems integrator (LSI) would be advantageous or 

disadvantageous in planning NGATS depends on a number of considerations. According 

to criteria developed by the National Academies, Committee on Systems Integration for 

Project Constellation, using an LSI could 

• provide better systems integration knowledge, experience, and capabilities; 

• recruit more talented personnel and manage complex organizational and 

international relationships; 

• better identify and obtain advanced technologies from many sources; 

• provide more experienced and disciplined project management experience; and 

• bring greater credibility (public and political) to the project. 

Determining whether the use of an LSI is the most efficient and effective way to achieve 

these goals for NGATS should be a major consideration in JPDO’s decision whether to 

engage an LSI. However, our work has shown that using an LSI does not guarantee 

success. For example, the Department of the Army (Army) has used an LSI for the 

Future Combat Systems because the program was the most significant technology and 

integration challenge that it had ever undertaken. Because of the complexity of this 

program, the lack of knowledgeable personnel, and the need for more management and 

acquisitions flexibility than could be obtained through normal contracting procedures, 

the Army selected an LSI. However, we reported that the program was behind schedule 

and over budget despite its use of an LSI. 

5 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

Questions for the Record Submitted by Ranking Member Mark Udall

1. Would a requirement—enforced by OMB—that the agencies involved in the 

JPDO develop an annual, coordinated, cross-agency budget laying out the 

resource allocations by agency and by JPDO-defined goal make the JPDO 

planning process more credible and help overcome the intrinsic weakness of a 

JPDO that doesn’t actually control budgets? 

Yes, we believe that an annual, coordinated, cross-agency budget request would be 

beneficial in trying to realize the goals of JPDO. We have previously stated that JPDO 

faces a challenge in leveraging resources among its partner agencies because JPDO is 

fundamentally a planning and coordinating body that lacks authority over the key human 

and financial resources needed to continue developing plans for NGATS. 

JPDO is currently working with OMB to develop a systematic means of reviewing the 

partner agency budget requests so that NGATS-related funding in each is easily 

identified. We plan to further explore these budgetary issues with JPDO and OMB as 

part of our ongoing work, and to report our findings later this year.

6 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

2. What do you consider to be the most important R&D challenges that will 

have to be overcome if the JPDO is to successfully deliver a Next Generation

Air Transportation System? 

Identifying important research and development (R&D) challenges will depend to some 

extent on the development of the NGATS enterprise architecture. However, it is already 

known that one important R&D challenge that must be overcome to deliver NGATS is to 

fully understand and address the human factors challenges associated with automation. 

For example, using automation raises questions about the extent to which the system 

will be automated and whether controllers will have the ability to accept or reject 

automated commands. Additionally, the human factors issues related to changing the 

workload of air traffic controllers and pilots is critically important because NGATS 

envisions a shift of some of a controller’s workload to pilots. Although JPDO has begun 

to model how shifts in air traffic controllers’ workloads would affect their performance, 

it has not yet begun to model the effect of how this shift in workload to pilots would 

affect pilot performance. According to a JPDO official, modeling the effect of changes in 

pilot workload has not yet begun because JPDO has not yet identified a suitable model 

for incorporation into its suite of modeling tools. 

Another important challenge facing JPDO’s delivery of NGATS will be obtaining the 

resources necessary to complete the R&D of technologies that NASA has initiated. With 

NASA’s new focus on fundamental aeronautics research, the agency does not intend to 

develop technology to the level that it did in the past. JPDO will have to fill this gap by 

leveraging the resources necessary to further develop, validate, and demonstrate these 

technologies. We plan to explore how NASA’s new focus on fundamental aeronautics 

research will impact the transition to NGATS as part of our ongoing work. 

7 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

3. How well are the various agencies’ R&D programs aligned with the

requirements of the NGATS? What will it take to ensure that the R&D 

programs are properly aligned? 

For alignment of R&D programs with the needs of NGATS, JPDO must identify the R&D 

projects across partner agencies that support NGATS and encourage the agencies to 

fund and develop these projects. These efforts are already under way, as JPDO is 

examining the partner agencies’ R&D programs to see if they are consistent with NGATS 

goals. As part of these efforts, JPDO has identified five early opportunities—R&D 

programs in the fiscal year 2007 budget that it can focus on immediately. These 

programs include network-enabled operations to strengthen national security, 

cooperative surveillance via ADS-B to increase security and safety, the development of 

SWIM, defining NGATS Required Total System Performance (RTSP), and aligning levels 

of service to match RTSP. 

The NGATS enterprise architecture, when completed, will be a key tool that helps 

partner agencies align their R&D programs. Because it will provide a blueprint for 

NGATS, partner agencies will better understand what R&D is needed to allow their 

systems to interact with those of other partner agencies in meeting the goals of NGATS. 

It will also help private sector manufacturers align their R&D activities to support 

NGATS. 

8 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

4. Is the current structure and authority of the JPDO adequate to meet the 

responsibilities given the Office to develop and implement the NGATS, and if 

not, what changes are needed? If you think changes are needed, how soon do 

they need to be made? 

To date, JPDO’s current organizational structure appears to facilitate the federal 

interagency collaboration that is central to JPDO’s mission. However, JPDO is 

fundamentally a planning and coordinating body that lacks authority over the key human 

and technological resources needed to continue developing plans and system 

requirements for NGATS. Consequently, the ability to continue leveraging resources of 

its partner agencies will be critical to JPDO’s success, especially as partner agencies’ will 

need to commit more resources for further refining and implementing NGATS.

Under its current structure, JPDO has begun taking critical steps to achieve its mission 

and align the resources of its partner agencies. These steps include efforts to identify 

opportunities for coordinating and leveraging partner agencies’ research and 

development efforts, using staff from the partner agencies to support JPDO work, and 

begin aligning its partner agencies’ budgets to support the NGATS. However, JPDO 

could be doing more under its current structure. For example, the institutionalization of 

roles and responsibilities is especially important since the NGATS effort will extend 

through eventual changes in agency and JPDO leadership. However, there is no formal, 

long-term agreement on the partner agencies’ roles and responsibilities in creating 

NGATS. 

As JPDO continues to evolve and mature as an organization, changes to JPDO’s authority 

and structure will need to be continuously evaluated and considered. Officials and 

stakeholders have suggested several options for changing the structure and authority of 

JPDO. These options include 

• making JPDO a program office with its own budget; 

• elevating the position of the JPDO director within FAA or DOT; 

• using an LSI; or 

• adding a legislative requirement for partner agencies to align their research 

projects with the NGATS goals. 

For example, NASA’s current reauthorization act requires the agency to align its aviation 

research projects to directly support the NGATS goals. This type of congressional action 

can reinforce accountability for the JPDO collaboration by aligning agency goals and 

strategies with those of the NGATS and further institutionalize the NGATS goals into 

partner agencies’ plans. However, before changes are made to JPDO’s structure and 

authority, the pros and cons of each of these options should be evaluated. 

9 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

5. What specific roles are human factors R&D and training playing in the design

of the NGATS, and how important are they to the overall success of the NGATS? 

JPDO officials have recognized the importance of human factors considerations for R&D 

and have indicated their intention to apply human factors throughout the planning and 

development phases of NGATS. For example, as part of the planning for NGATS, JPDO 

has used modeling to study how changes in the duties of air traffic controllers could 

affect the workload and performance of other airport ground personnel. The human 

factors issues related to shifting some workload from air traffic controllers to pilots is 

also critically important. However, JPDO has not yet begun to model the effect of this 

shift on pilot performance because, according to a JPDO official, the office has not yet 

identified a suitable model for incorporation into its suite of modeling tools. 

JPDO also intends to study the human factors implications of training air traffic 

controllers. A JPDO official said that they have not yet begun to assess these 

implications because the enterprise architecture—a blueprint for NGATS which will 

indicate the technologies to be used—is still being prepared. However, the transition 

from the current NAS to NGATS could affect training. For example, according to a JPDO 

official, it is anticipated that, during the transition period, controllers will have to be 

cross-trained on both the equipment being replaced as well as the NGATS equipment, 

resulting in increased training costs. 

JPDO officials have also indicated that they anticipate using human factors 

considerations to plan and validate the operational concepts during the research and 

development phase that have been identified for NGATS. Human factors considerations 

include the development of scenarios to use for testing new equipment as well as to 

explore training needs of aviation personnel. 

5a. What do you think are the most important human factors issues to be 

addressed? 

While JPDO officials have identified some important human factors issues to date, 

additional important human factors issues include how new procedures and 

technologies are introduced to controllers; what techniques are used to train controllers; 

what support equipment, such as simulators, can be introduced to aid controller training; 

and whether various controller functions should be replaced by automation or remain 

manual with some automated actions that support the controller. 

10 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

5b. NASA has lost a number of its human factors researchers in recent years—

what impact will that have on the ability of the JPDO to address the key human 

factors issues associated with the NGATS? 

We have not yet examined the contributions of NASA researchers to JPDO’s efforts on 

human factors. We plan to explore this issue and include our findings in our report on 

JPDO to be released later this year.

11 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

6. What is the relationship between FAA’s Air Traffic Organization and the 

JPDO—is it sufficiently well defined? 

FAA’s Air Traffic Organization (ATO) has responsibility for operating, maintaining, and 

modernizing the current air traffic control system. JPDO is responsible for planning and 

coordinating the broader, longer-term transformation to NGATS. The formal 

relationship is that JPDO reports to ATO’s Chief Operating Officer for day-to-day 

management oversight and to FAA’s Administrator for national direction. At present, 

this relationship is in the process of maturing. Within the last year, ATO has reportedly 

modified its modernization plans to represent the FAA portion of JPDO’s plan for 

NGATS. This is a positive development. 

Our work has shown that collaborating agencies should work together to define and 

agree on the respective roles and responsibilities, including how the collaborative effort 

will be led. In JPDO’s case, there is no formalized long-term agreement with any of the 

partner agencies, including FAA, on their roles and responsibilities in creating NGATS. 

According to JPDO officials, a memorandum of understanding that would define partner 

agency relationships was being developed as of August 2005, but has not yet been 

completed. 

Further definition of the roles and responsibilities between ATO and JPDO will be 

particularly important, since both organizations have responsibilities related to planning 

NAS modernization. JPDO’s planning must build upon the ATO’s existing modernization

program, while the ATO must ensure that its ongoing modernization efforts are 

consistent with JPDO’s plans. ATO faces a challenge in funding the current system to 

keep it up and running on a 24/7 basis while funding the transition to NGATS. 

JPDO’s former director served concurrently as the ATO’s Vice President for Operations 

Planning, which helped with coordination between the two organizations. However, 

FAA now plans to establish separate positions for the JPDO Director and the ATO Vice 

President for Operations Planning. Doing so increases the importance of establishing a 

clearly defined relationship between these organizations. 

12 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

7. Through what mechanisms are the views of industry being incorporated in 

the JPDO planning process, and how well are those mechanisms working thus 

far? What, if anything, would you recommend be done to improve the 

interaction of industry with the JPDO planning process? 

JPDO’s mechanism for incorporating industry’s views into the planning process is the 

NGATS Institute (the Institute). The Institute was created within a non-profit arm of the 

Aerospace Industries Association. Its mission is to facilitate the participation of experts 

from the private sector, academia, and state and local governments with the JPDO, and 

to conduct special studies. To date, the Institute has placed 197 experts on the IPTs. 

The Institute is governed by a 16-member Institute Management Council (IMC), which is 

broadly representative of the aviation stakeholder community. The IMC’s co-chairs, for 

example, are from the Air Line Pilots Association (which represents commercial pilots) 

and the Air Transport Association (which represents major commercial airlines). Other 

members are from regional airline operations, business aircraft operations, helicopter 

operations, and other aviation-related entities. The Institute held its first public meeting 

on March 28, 2006, in Washington, D.C. IMC board members and JPDO officials 

answered questions from attendees and discussed NGATS challenges. 

The Institute is also holding a series of investment analysis workshops to collect 

information from industry to provide input on NGATS programs, costs, sequence, and 

schedule. The first workshop, in April 2006, was for members of the commercial and 

business aviation community. In May or June, a second workshop is planned for general 

aviation, military, and public safety sectors. A third workshop is planned for early July 

for airports and state and regional aviation groups. JPDO plans to spend six months 

working with participants from the three workshops to refine its cost estimates. 

JPDO could improve the interaction of the aviation industry in its planning process by 

incorporating greater industry input into JPDO’s four divisions—Enterprise 

Architecture, Enterprise Engineering and Integration, Portfolio Management, and 

Evaluation and Analysis. This could include seeking the expertise of industry experts to 

work collaboratively to develop the operational concepts and performance requirements 

that will make up JPDO’s enterprise architecture. In addition, we believe that producing 

tangible benefits early on will be a key factor in sustaining the involvement of industry 

stakeholders. 

13 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Ranking Member Udall] 

8. Are there any technology transfer issues that need to be addressed? Will 

NASA, for example, support development activities to the point where industry 

will pick up advanced development needed for deployment of key technologies? 

NASA does not plan to support technology development to the point where industry is 

willing to step in. NASA plans to focus on fundamental research and then turn work over 

to FAA for further development. While a NASA official noted that developing technology 

to higher levels before industry picks it up does not necessarily guarantee success, a 

draft report from FAA’s Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee 

(REDAC) points out that placing a greater reliance on FAA to perform the further R&D 

(heretofore performed by NASA) would require FAA to establish the infrastructure 

needed to perform this work. REDAC concluded that such developments would delay 

NGATS implementation—probably by five years. Participants at JPDO’s recent NGATS 

Investment Analysis Workshop, which included representatives from commercial 

airlines, business aviation, and aviation equipment supply industry, said that industry has 

no interest in filling this gap due to the risk and lack of profit opportunity. We are 

currently evaluating whether NASA’s reorientation of its aeronautics program to

fundamental research leaves a gap in the technology transfer process. 

14 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

Question for the Record Submitted by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee

1. What is the reason for the lack of participation of the air traffic controllers 

in the activities of the JPDO, and what is the impact of their lack of 

participation? 

Our research showed that the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) 

initially assigned a controller to JPDO as part of its liaison program with the FAA. On 

June 28, 2005, FAA notified NATCA that it was terminating the liaison assignments 

effective July 29, 2005, citing budget constraints and the implementation of the ATO. The 

controller who had been acting as the liaison within JPDO’s Agile Air Traffic System IPT

was among the controllers who returned to his facility. Since that time, no active 

controller has participated in the NGATS planning effort of JPDO. 

At a more senior level, in May 2005, NATCA President John Carr sought and was given a 

seat on the IMC, which oversees the policy and recommendations of the NGATS 

Institute. The Institute itself is the mechanism for incorporating the views of 

stakeholders from private industry, state and local governments, and academia into the 

work of JPDO. Mr. Carr subsequently notified the IMC that he could not attend the 

meetings. On December 14, 2005, he was notified by the IMC that he had been removed 

for lack of attendance at the IMC’s meetings. According to JPDO officials, the IMC has 

left a seat open in hopes that the controllers will participate in NGATS after a new labormanagement agreement between NATCA and FAA has been settled. 

We believe that adequate stakeholder participation in the planning and development of 

NGATS is critical. In particular, the participation of current air traffic controllers is 

important because NGATS will likely involve major technological and operational 

changes that will affect their work. Our work on FAA’s current air traffic control 

modernization program has shown that without early and continuing stakeholder input, 

costly rework and delays can occur late in system development. Similarly, the input of 

active controllers on JPDO’s planned research—especially on how controllers interact 

with pilots and air traffic systems in a highly automated environment—can help to 

identify potential safety issues early, before costly changes become necessary. 

Controllers’ input could also inform JPDO’s analyses of issues such as timeliness, costeffectiveness, and the safe transformation of the nation’s air traffic control system. 

15 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

Questions for the Record Submitted by Representative Jim Costa

1. Does the JPDO believe that the Next Generation Air Transportation System

(NGATS) will be able to handle three times today’s traffic if the nation’s major 

airports are not modernized as well? 

JPDO will have to consider several issues related to airport capacity. JPDO’s Evaluation 

and Analysis Division has modeled the capacity of the national airspace system (NAS) 

and found that the 35 largest airports will be a critical factor in limiting the capacity of 

the NAS as they reach their saturation points. JPDO models indicate that capacity at 

almost half of these 35 airports will be limited. 

While JPDO expects to add runways at some of these large airports and increase the use 

of nearby secondary airports, JPDO anticipates that this solution still leaves airport 

capacity 12 percent below that needed to accommodate a three-fold increase. Moreover, 

increased use of secondary airports could raise environmental and infrastructure issues. 

For example, local residents could object to increased noise, and travelers could have 

concerns about transportation to and from these airports. 

JPDO’s Airport IPT has been considering how airport capacity can be expanded. While 

JPDO and FAA are integrating JPDO’s NGATS plan and FAA’s Operational Evolution 

Plan into one plan, an official told us that the ability of JPDO to enhance airport capacity 

is still limited because enhancement decisions are made at the state and local level. The 

official also noted that JPDO cannot channel federal funds from the Airport 

Improvement Program to airports where capacity expansion is most needed. 

16 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Representative Costa] 

2. How will the NGATS be able to mitigate the impact severe weather has on 

the system? 

The NGATS will never be able to completely address the impact of severe weather on the 

NAS, but could mitigate the impact. Currently, FAA holds daily conference calls to 

attempt to manage the flow of air traffic during the spring and summer thunderstorm 

season, but those efforts are hampered by inconsistent data and forecasts. Fast moving 

thunderstorms, which are difficult to predict with the required precision to support 

aviation operations, can needlessly ground aircraft thousands of miles away resulting in 

flight delays and cancellations. JPDO estimates that 60 percent of weather delays are 

potentially avoidable. 

Although in NGATS, aircraft will still need to navigate around the most severe weather 

events, JPDO expects that NGATS will be able to better manage the problem that severe 

weather poses to the flow of air traffic. To this end, JPDO and its partner agencies are 

undertaking several initiatives. For example, JPDO’s Evaluation and Analysis division is 

developing computer models to forecast the results of storms to show how they would 

affect capacity around an airport. The Weather IPT is studying aircraft systems that 

would help reduce the effects of turbulence on the aircraft and passengers. The 

Department of Defense, FAA, NASA, and NOAA are working to combine an array of 

weather data into one real-time weather picture by using data from tens of thousands of 

global weather observations and sensor reports from ground, air, and space-based 

sources. The expectation is that every aircraft will become a node in the NGATS 

network, thereby ensuring that all users of the system have access to the same sensoryrich information. Sensors will help produce computerized forecasts that will improve 

forecasting, thereby providing more usable airspace around storms. 

17 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Representative Costa] 

3. Keeping in mind that nearly all of today’s delays are due to severe weather, 

runway limitations, and over scheduling: Is it reasonable for us to believe that 

the billions of dollars the JPDO’s proposals are sure to cost in the 

implementation of the NGATS will solve the delay problems we already face 

today? 

It is doubtful that JPDO’s efforts will completely eliminate delays, especially when they 

are weather-related, but we and others have reported that maintaining the status quo will 

result in gridlock and significant losses to the nation's economy if airspace demand 

triples by 2025. JPDO is seeking a variety of solutions to increase capacity and efficiency 

throughout the system. 

As noted in the NGATS Integrated Plan, there has never been a transformation effort 

similar to this one with as many stakeholders and as broad in scope. Through 

collaboration and new technologies, JPDO hopes to meet the challenge of projected 

demand that will soon surpass the current system’s capacity. This involves an entirely 

new approach—one that uses modern communication technologies, advanced 

computers, precision plotting through the global positioning system (GPS), and modern 

computer-based decision-assistance programs. For example, JPDO is developing more 

precise ways to manage the impact of bad weather. Through the Weather IPT, JPDO is 

employing extensive computer modeling to develop better predictive forecasts to help 

pilots avoid bad weather. Improvements in forecasts will allow pilots and controllers to 

more precisely pinpoint severe weather. 

In addition, FAA is revamping its Operational Evolution Plan to enhance capacity at the 

nation’s 35 largest airports so that its scope and time frames for accomplishments are 

more consistent with JPDO’s. To maximize runway usage, JPDO is planning to build on 

FAA programs that permit planes to land on some parallel runways in low visibility 

conditions. Low visibility currently eliminates the use of parallel approaches and 

landings at some airports, which reduces capacity. 

Some airports present unique challenges. For example, LaGuardia cannot build more 

runways due to space constraints. For such airports, JPDO is considering administrative 

options, such as limiting the number of takeoffs and landings at peak hours, or 

permitting only certain types of aircraft to land there. JPDO is also considering marketbased options, such as charging a premium to land during peak usage time. 

18 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
Enclosure 

[Representative Costa] 

4. What does the JPDO see as the most urgent problem that needs to be

addressed in the near future, not 25 years down the road? 

Several near-term challenges facing the NGATS effort were identified by JPDO officials 

and other participants in a recent public meeting of the NGATS Institute. A number of 

participants mentioned that development of a cost estimate for NGATS is critical, since 

Congress needs to understand what it will take to fund NGATS. Another challenge 

identified was institutionalizing the collaborative processes established by JPDO. Given 

the 2025 time frame and the complexity of the effort, it is important that JPDO be able to 

withstand changes in staffing and administrations. Institutionalizing the collaborative 

process in the short term will strengthen the ability to achieve success in the long term. 

Another near-term challenge identified by a meeting participant was the need to 

effectively communicate the importance of the transition from the current system to 

NGATS. An NGATS official noted that the American public needs to be educated about 

the effects of not going forward with this transition. Raising the awareness and support 

of policy makers about NGATS now, while it is in the planning stages, could lead to a 

more proactive and cost-effective transition in the long run. 

One challenge—establishing the credibility of the NGATS effort—was mentioned at the 

public meeting as well as at an expert panel that we conducted in March 2006 to discuss 

JPDO and NGATS. As we have previously stated, although FAA is now doing a better job

of meeting milestones with its major air traffic control acquisition programs, earlier 

attempts at modernizing the NAS encountered many difficulties. JPDO will need to show 

nonfederal stakeholders that the NGATS effort, while complex, is moving forward and 

has the commitment of the partner agencies behind it. Establishing the federal 

government’s commitment to NGATS should help JPDO to maintain the interest and 

enthusiasm of nonfederal stakeholders who are participating on a pro bono basis in the 

NGATS effort. 

(540127)

19 GAO-06-778R Responses to Questions from JPDO Hearing 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER