Employee Attitudes Within 

the Air Traffic Organization

Carla A. Hackworth1

Crystal E. Cruz1

Dan G. Jack2 

Scott Goldman1

S. Janine King2

1

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

Federal Aviation Administration

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

2

Omni Corporation

P.O. Box 25082

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

December 2004

Final Report

This document is available to the public through: 

•The Defense Technical Information Center

Ft. Belvior, VA 22060

•The National Technical Information Service

Springfield, VA 22161

Office of Aerospace Medicine

Washington, DC 20591

DOT/FAA/AM-04/23
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of

the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of

information exchange. The United States Government

assumes no liability for the contents thereof.
i

Technical Report Documentation Page 

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 

DOT/FAA/AM-04/23 

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date 

Employee Attitudes Within the Air Traffic Organization December 2004 

6. Performing Organization Code 

7. Author(s) 

Carla A. Hackworth,1 Crystal E. Cruz,1 Dan G. Jack,2Scott Goldman,1

and S. Janine King2

8. Performing Organization Report No. 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 1

FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

P.O. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, OK 73125 

2

OMNI Corporation

P.O. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

11. Contract or Grant No. 

12. Sponsoring Agency name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

14. Sponsoring Agency Code 

Office of Aerospace Medicine 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

15. Supplemental Notes 

Work was accomplished under approved subtask AM-B-03-HRR-522.

16. Abstract 

In 2003, the Federal Aviation Administration established an air traffic performance-based organization called 

the Air Traffic Organization (ATO). The purpose of this paper was to combine data from the former ATS, 

ARA, and AOZ organizations from the 2003 Employee Attitude Survey (EAS) into the appropriate post-ATO 

service units to establish a baseline for comparison with future EAS results. Of the 48,900 surveys that were 

mailed to FAA employees in 2003, 22,720 (46%) were considered valid returns. Of these, 15,233 fit into the 

new ATO structure. Items from the survey that corresponded to the ATO management team core values of 

integrity and honesty, accountability and responsibility, commitment to excellence, commitment to people, 

and fiscal responsibility were summarized for each service unit within ATO. Results indicated that the 

operations service units (En Route and Oceanic, Terminal, Flight Services, System Operations, and Technical 

Operations) generally reported fewer favorable responses on most survey items related to the core values. This 

was particularly true for the items related to integrity and honesty, accountability and responsibility, and 

commitment to people. It is important to note that the operations service units make up the bulk of ATO 

personnel. One area in which the operations service units were more positive than the support service units 

related to workgroup knowledge and skills, where positive ratings were quite high for all ATO service units, 

indicating that ATO employees believe their co-workers have the knowledge and skills to be effective in their 

jobs. These data illuminate the areas that should be targeted for intervention through specific action plans and 

well-defined communication plans and provide a baseline for comparison to future EAS administrations. 

17. Key Words 

Employee Surveys, Survey Feedback, Air Traffic Document is available to the public through the 

Defense Technical Information Center, Ft. 

Belvior, VA 22060; and the National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. 

19. Security Classif (of this report) 20. Security Classif (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price 

Unclassified Unclassified 18 

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized 

1

EMPLOYEE ATTITUDES WITHIN THE AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

INTRODUCTION

In the past few years, there have been concerted efforts 

within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to control operating costs and improve efficiency and safety while 

increasing customer satisfaction. The American Customer 

Satisfaction Index (ACSI, 2003) was developed to baseline 

customer perceptions of air traffic professionalism and 

safety. In an effort to provide improved services at lower 

costs, the FAA took several steps to change their business 

practices. This included introducing a new performance 

appraisal system, converting many employees to the Core 

Compensation pay system, and establishing an air traffic 

performance-based organization (PBO) called the Air 

Traffic Organization (ATO). 

A PBO is designed to link accountability with clear 

objectives, measurable performance goals, and customer service standards. A PBO aims for improved 

performance while managing for results. (See Web site 

[www.ato.faa.gov] for What is a PBO.) Along with the 

creation of the new PBO, there were simultaneous changes 

in the documentation of organizational costs and a reduction in the layers of management within the ATO. 

These changes were intended to provide managers with 

better tools to track costs and spending, and establish 

a closer link between employees and ATO executives. 

(See Web site [www.ato.faa.gov] for ATO Implementation Strategy.) 

The creation of a performance-based organization required the merger of more than 37,000 FAA employees 

into air traffic service units. The ATO was established in 

November 2003 by combining Research and Acquisitions (ARA) and Air Traffic Services (ATS) with a staff 

organization, Free Flight (AOZ).1 The resulting ATO 

includes ten service units: 

1. Finance (ATO-F), 2. Acquisition and Business Services (ATO-A), 3. Safety (ATO-S), 4. Operations Planning 

(ATO-P), 5. Communications (ATO-C), 6. Terminal 

(ATO-T), 7. En Route and Oceanic (ATO-E), 8. Flight 

Services (ATO-D), 9. System Operations (ATO-R), and 

10. Technical Operations (ATO-W). 

The first five units provide support functions, whereas 

the latter five accomplish operational functions (see 

www.ato.faa.gov for “ATO Implementation Strategy” 

version 1.3). 

As a result of the re-organization into a PBO, many 

employees may have experienced a number of changes in 

their work environment, supervisory chain of command, 

and expectations in job functions. Due to the fairly prescribed job role of employees in the field (e.g., air traffic 

control), these changes have likely been more dramatic 

for the support service units located at headquarters than 

for the operations service units located in the field. Given 

the difficulties inherent in organizational change, the 

ATO transition staff has made efforts to communicate 

with managers about how changes will be implemented, 

how those changes will affect all involved, and what the 

new expectations will be for each service unit within the 

ATO (see www.ato.faa.gov for “Workshops are Helping 

Managers Help Us: Understanding Change and Moving 

Forward”). 

Changes in an organization, however, can hamper 

relations between employees and management. Morgan and Zeffane (2003) found in their analysis of more 

than 19,000 employees that organizational change at 

the structural level (i.e., restructuring of divisions) was 

related to reduced trust in management. However, not 

all findings were negative. For example, when employees 

perceived that supervisors or higher-level management 

had directly consulted employees about the organizational 

changes, there was a positive relationship with trust in 

management.

One vehicle used by the FAA to assess the impact of 

organizational change is the Employee Attitude Survey 

(EAS), formerly known as the Employee Survey or the 

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). This survey has been administered to FAA employees nine times beginning in 

1984. The most recent EAS measured employee attitudes 

toward job satisfaction, satisfaction with compensation, 

organizational commitment, confidence in management, 

performance management, and work environment. The 

survey was administered in September 2003, prior to 

the creation of the ATO. In this paper, we provide a 

baseline for employee attitudes within each service unit 

of the ATO so that areas of interest can be tracked for 

this newly formed organization. 

Based on the results of the EAS 2000 survey, the ARA 

Management Team (ARAMT) identified core values they 

felt could support or hinder the achievement of ARA organizational goals. The new ATO Executive Council (ATOEC) 

adopted the core values (Table 1) identified by the ARAMT, 

and data from the EAS regarding the core values will be 

used by the ATOEC to establish focus areas that will be 

addressed during the interim years of the EAS. 
2 

Table 1. Crosswalk of ATO Core Values With Selected EAS Items** 

Core Values Behaviors EAS 2003 Items 

Integrity and Honesty 

Essentially, this value says 

we will play it straight. We 

will say what’s on our 

minds, and we will be 

willing to offer frank 

commentary when it is 

needed. And most 

importantly, we will do what 

we say we are going to do. 

• Communicate the commitment 

• Be honest 

• Do the right thing 

• Challenge each other 

• Support each other 

• Take ownership of ATOEC 

decisions 

• Do what you say you are going 

to do 

• Approve programs consistent 

with available funds/resources

Item 23: Some employees may be hesitant to 

speak up for fear of retaliation.* 

Item 24: It is generally safer to say that you 

agree with management even when you don't 

really agree.* 

Item 25: We are encouraged to express our 

concerns openly. 

Item 28: Conflicts and differences in my 

organization are brought out and managed 

rather than avoided or worked around. 

Item 70: Supervisors where I work trust 

employees. 

Accountability and 

Responsibility 

This value involves taking 

the broad view, the 

corporate view if you will, 

and getting behind the 

agency’s mission. It is 

more than just caring about 

our own service unit. 

Rather, it is about 

understanding the agency’s 

overall mission and making 

sure we do our part to see 

that it is accomplished. 

• Take a corporate view and act 

honestly 

• No turf issues 

• Make decisions with a 

corporate view 

• Honor commitments 

• No passing the buck 

• Address and manage conflicts 

• Commit to and regularly state 

our mission 

• Commit to the organizational 

goals 

Item 74: Corrective actions are taken to deal 

with nonsupervisory employees who perform 

poorly. 

Item 75: Corrective actions are taken to deal 

with supervisors or managers who perform 

poorly. 

Item 88: Managers and supervisors in my 

organization are held accountable for 

achieving important agency goals. 

Item 89: Nonsupervisory employees in my 

organization are held accountable for 

achieving important agency goals. 

Commitment to 

Excellence 

Excellence is demanding a 

high quality of performance 

from us and from others. It 

is about setting a high 

standard and living up to it. 

It is more than just trying; it 

is about really 

accomplishing what we set 

out to do. It involves 

professional quality work, 

recognizing that if we don’t 

know how to do something, 

we need to ask for help and 

learn how. 

• Come prepared 

• Play full out 

• Do the right thing the first time 

• Accept responsibility and 

consequences for our actions 

Item 21: In my organization, there are service 

goals aimed at meeting customer 

expectations. 

Item 22: In my organization, managers show 

commitment to customer support through their 

actions. 

Item 76: Communications with my supervisor 

about my performance have helped clarify 

what is expected from me in my job. 

Item 78: I am clear about how "good 

performance" is defined in my organization. 

Item 79: My organization has clearly 

communicated the connection between my 

individual performance goals and my 

organization's performance goals. 
3

METHOD

During September 2003, approximately 48,900 

surveys were mailed to all FAA employees at their 

work addresses. A total of 22,720 valid surveys were returned. Of those, 15,233 were from respondents who 

were subsequently transitioned into the ATO (Table 2). 

With guidance from points of contact (POCs) within 

the restructured organizations, the data were combined 

into the ATO service units.2 This was accomplished by 

categorizing data into the designated ATO service units 

by using routing symbols provided on the EAS 2003. 

In most cases, entire organizations were moved into a 

single ATO service unit, but occasionally this was not 

possible. In cases where the EAS organization did not 

exactly match the organizational structure for ATO, 

placement decisions were made based on feedback from 

the POCs. The pre-ATO routing symbols that make up 

each of the newly created ATO service units are presented 

in Appendix A. 

Table 2 presents the resulting breakout of the respondents within each of the ATO service units. The majority 

of the ATO is made up of operations service units (i.e., 

ATO-D, -E, -R, -T, and -W). Similarly, the majority 

(94%) of respondents were from the operations service 

units. These employees are located in a variety of facility 

types across the country, including large en route centers, 

large and small air traffic control TRACONS and towers, 

and other operations facilities. The support service units, 

on the other hand, make up a much smaller proportion 

of the ATO and, as in the case of ATO-S, may be located 

entirely at FAA headquarters. 

After the creation of the new dataset, percent positive 

values were generated for each of the EAS 2003 ATOEC 

core value items by summing the top two response anchors 

(i.e., agree and stronglyagree for agreement items or somewhat

satisfied and verysatisfied for satisfaction items). In the case 

of a reverse-scored agreement item, the lowest two response 

anchors (i.e., disagree and strongly disagree) were summed. 

No satisfaction scale items were reverse scored. 

Table 1 (continued). Crosswalk of ATO Core Values With Selected EAS Items** 

Core Values Behaviors EAS 2003 Items 

Commitment to People 

This value covers several 

different themes. First, it 

involves a commitment to 

recognize that the ATOEC 

is made up of many 

different people – each with 

their own perspectives and 

experiences. It involves a 

commitment to treat each 

other with civility and 

fairness. It also involves 

taking an interest in one 

another. We should be 

concerned if someone is 

having difficulty in their 

personal life or needs our 

help.

• Treat people fairly 

• Accept the differences in the 

management team 

• Listen to different views 

• Balance valuing different views 

with actions taken 

• Provide honest feedback 

• Take a personal interest in 

each other 

• Support each other 

• Develop the workforce to meet 

the needs of the organization 

Item 11: Overall, how satisfied are you with the 

recognition you receive for doing a good job? 

Item 14: It's pretty common to hear "job-welldone" within my organization. 

Item 15: Promotions in my organization are 

given to those who are well qualified. 

Item 16: Recognition and rewards are based 

on merit. 

Item 64: Within the past 2 years, I have seen 

positive change in the emphasis that the FAA 

places on managing people. 

Item 66: My organization has a real interest in 

the welfare and satisfaction of those who work 

here.

Item 69: People in my organization get the 

credit they deserve for the work they do. 

Fiscal Responsibility 

(No description available.) 

(No behaviors available. Items were 

chosen that dealt with 

communication, metric collection, 

and skill set.) 

Item 80: Information collected on my 

workgroup's performance is used to improve 

my workgroup's performance. 

Item 90: Policies affecting my work are 

communicated adequately. 

Item 97: My workgroup has the knowledge 

and skills to be effective in their jobs. 

* Item reverse scored. 

** Table 1 was adapted from a table provided by Jack Jackson via E-mail, May 2004. 
4 

RESULTS

Aspects of each of the ATOEC core value areas are 

discussed. Percent-positive results for the core value items 

are presented in Table 3 for the ATO overall and for employees within each of the service units. The ATO EAS 

POCs determined that items at 40% or below require a 

plan of action for improvement, while items with scores 

of 55% or greater indicate areas of strength and are being documented in a best practices library. The range of 

positive responses for the component items of each core 

value is presented for the ATO overall. Additionally, ATO 

service units with the highest and lowest percent-positive 

responses on each item are noted. Keep in mind that differences of one or two percent are negligible. 

Integrity and Honesty. This core value underlines 

the importance of honoring commitments, ensuring a 

communication climate where employees feel safe to 

express their concerns, and providing honest feedback. 

Table 3 shows that across the five items within the core 

value of integrity and honesty, percent-positive rates for 

the ATO overall ranged from a low of 20% positive for 

conflict management (item 28) to a high of 40% positive 

that supervisors trust employees (item 70). These data are 

comparable to the FAA as a whole; with 22% positive for 

conflict management and 42% positive for supervisors trust 

employees. However, the ATO service units were varied in 

their beliefs. ATO-D had the lowest percent-positive rate 

for item 23, fear of retaliation (22%), and ATO-D and 

ATO-A shared the lowest percent-positive rate for item 

24, safer to agree with management (30%, respectively), 

while ATO-E employees had the lowest percent-positive 

rates for items 25, 28, and 70, encouraged to express concerns (28%), conflict management (13%), and supervisors 

trust employees (31%). ATO-S, a much smaller unit in 

comparison, had the highest percent-positive rates on 

four of the five items (i.e., item 23, 36%; item 24, 36%; 

item 25, 62%; and item 28, 40%). ATO-F respondents 

had the highest positive rate for item 70, supervisors trust 

employees (59%). 

Accountability and Responsibility. This core value 

related to holding employees accountable for performing assigned tasks and taking corrective actions to deal 

with poor performers. ATO percent-positive scores 

ranged from 14% to 33% over the four items in this 

core value. These results suggest that dealing with poor 

performers is an issue for the ATO as a whole. Overall, more respondents reported that corrective actions 

are taken to deal with poorly performing nonsupervisory 

employees (item 74; 20%) than with supervisors or 

managers (item 75; 14%). These data are consistent 

with the pattern of results for the FAA as a whole. No 

distinction was made between nonsupervisors and 

management with regard to being held accountable 

for achieving important agency goals in that both items 

88 and 89 received endorsement from 33% of ATO 

respondents. Two of the support service units, ATO-F 

and ATO-S, had the lowest percent positive for items 

74 (13%) and 75 (4%), respectively, while ATO-E had 

the lowest percent positive for items 88 (24%) and 89 

(27%). The highest percent-positive rates, however, 

were again provided by employees within the support 

service units, with ATO-S being the highest for items 

74 (28%), 88 (57%), and 89 (53%), and ATO-F being 

the highest for item 75 (22%). 

Table 2. Number of Responses Within the Air Traffic 

Organization Service Units* 

Service Unit Frequency % of ATO Respondents 

ATO-F 32 0.2 

ATO-A 244 1.6 

ATO-S 50 0.3 

ATO-P 537 3.5 

ATO-D 1,320 8.7 

ATO-E 2,738 18.0 

ATO-R 134 0.9 

ATO-T 5,024 33.0 

ATO-W 5,154 33.8 

*If employees did not identify their work unit or facility on the EAS 2003 demographics, their 

data could not be transitioned into the new ATO dataset.
5

Core Values and Items ATO Support Service Units Operations Service Units 

Overall ATO-F ATO-A ATO-S ATO-P ATO-T ATO-E ATO-D ATO-R ATO-W 

Integrity and Honesty 

Item 23: Some employees may be hesitant to speak up for fear of retaliation.* 

26.21 31.25 26.36 36.00 31.71 25.35 25.62 21.70 30.08 27.70 

Item 24: It is generally safer to say that you agree with management even when you don't really agree.* 

31.20 31.25 30.00 36.00 33.83 32.09 30.72 29.77 30.83 30.71 

Item 25: We are encouraged to express our concerns openly. 

36.83 53.13 45.99 62.00 48.04 34.32 27.99 32.98 42.86 42.83 

Item 28: Conflicts and differences in my organization are brought out and managed rather than avoided or worked around.

19.59 28.13 27.98 40.00 29.03 17.86 13.28 16.43 21.05 23.78 

Item 70: Supervisors where I work trust employees. 39.70 59.38 42.32 51.06 53.28 36.94 30.59 32.26 46.97 47.14 

Accountability and Responsibility 

Item 74: Corrective actions are taken to deal with nonsupervisory employees who perform poorly. 

20.42 12.50 22.27 27.66 16.35 22.57 15.98 25.35 15.27 19.87 

Item 75: Corrective actions are taken to deal with supervisors or managers who perform poorly. 

14.38 21.88 15.55 4.35 12.52 14.81 12.57 15.36 11.54 14.93 

Item 88: Managers and supervisors in my organization are held accountable for achieving important agency goals. 

32.69 56.25 53.94 57.45 47.44 27.54 23.85 26.45 35.11 40.97 

Item 89: Nonsupervisory employees in my organization are held accountable for achieving important agency goals.

33.33 37.50 47.93 53.19 42.42 29.38 27.38 29.05 30.77 39.60 

Commitment to Excellence 

Item 21: In my organization, there are service goals aimed at meeting customer expectations. 

50.08 56.67 65.70 64.00 67.30 46.52 41.80 38.49 52.63 58.13 

Item 22: In my organization, managers show commitment to customer support through their actions. 

38.35 56.25 57.32 56.00 55.18 34.34 26.75 30.85 49.24 47.15 

Item 76: Communications with my supervisor about my performance have helped clarify what is expected from me in my job. 

44.13 34.38 54.73 55.56 53.02 40.76 38.05 45.43 38.64 48.95 

Item 78: I am clear about how "good performance" is defined in my organization. 

43.63 50.00 52.67 52.17 55.18 42.33 38.63 41.17 40.77 46.48 

Item 79: My organization has clearly communicated the connection between my individual performance goals and my organization's performance goals. 

30.75 31.25 48.35 58.70 46.23 27.28 22.85 24.46 30.53 37.18 

Table 3. Percent Positive Response Rates for Core Value Items by ATO Service Unit
6

Table 3 (continued). Percent Positive Response Rates for Core Value Items by ATO Service Unit

Core Values and Items ATO Support Function Units Operations Function Units 

Overall ATO-F ATO-A ATO-S ATO-P ATO-T ATO-E ATO-D ATO-R ATO-W 

Commitment to People 

Item 11: Overall, how satisfied are you with the recognition you receive for doing a good job? 

33.04 43.75 47.28 54.00 55.72 29.60 25.42 24.58 34.59 39.24 

Item 14: It's pretty common to hear "job-well-done" within my organization. 

29.62 48.39 48.15 52.00 52.05 26.06 20.57 19.36 29.85 36.98 

Item 15: Promotions in my organization are given to those who are well qualified. 

15.60 31.25 27.92 36.73 26.47 11.82 10.76 12.80 14.93 20.61 

Item 16: Recognition and rewards are based on merit. 19.61 29.03 32.37 35.42 35.48 16.77 12.82 16.78 20.45 24.24 Item 64: Within the past 2 years, I have seen positive change in the emphasis that the FAA places on managing people.

12.75 19.35 24.48 23.40 20.83 11.34 9.29 7.19 12.31 15.83 

Item 66: My organization has a real interest in the welfare and satisfaction of those who work here. 

25.65 50.00 38.93 46.81 43.61 22.49 17.57 15.68 37.88 32.35 

Item 69: People in my organization get the credit they deserve for the work they do. 

24.26 56.25 42.39 48.94 47.47 19.94 15.12 16.51 25.00 31.53 

Fiscal Responsibility 

Item 80: Information collected on my workgroup's performance is used to improve my workgroup's performance. 

19.34 19.35 29.24 46.67 28.65 16.38 13.22 14.89 18.25 24.94 

Item 90: Policies affecting my work are communicated adequately. 

38.19 53.13 53.33 54.00 52.35 34.82 31.83 32.13 38.17 43.96 

Item 97: My workgroup has the knowledge and skills to be effective in their jobs. 

71.79 78.13 69.33 86.00 75.28 69.98 71.63 71.89 79.84 72.97 

*Item is reverse scored. 
7

Commitment to Excellence. This core value outlines 

the importance of delivering excellent service. Across the 

five items included in this core value, percent-positive values 

ranged from a low of 31% for clear communication of performance goals (item 79) to a high of 50% agreement that 

there are service goals aimed at meeting customer expectations

(item 21). Respondents within the operations service units 

ATO-D and ATO-E provided the lowest rates for four of 

the five items. ATO-D reported the lowest endorsement 

regarding service goals (item 21; 38%), while ATO-E 

reported the lowest agreement for items 22, 78, and 79, 

managers show commitment to customer support (27%), clear 

about how “good performance” is defined (39%), and clear 

communication of performance goals (23%). ATO-F had the 

fewest individuals indicate that communications with their 

supervisors have helped clarify performance expectations (item 

76; 34%). The support service units provided the highest 

percent-positive response rates: ATO-A (item 22; 57%), 

ATO-S (items 76 and 79; 56% and 59%), and ATO-P 

(items 21 and 78; 67% and 55%, respectively). 

Commitment to People. Recognizing the contribution 

of fellow employees, extending support to each other, and 

treating employees fairly are the basic themes of this core 

value. For the ATO overall, items in this core value ranged 

from a low of 13% agreement that employees had seen positive change in the emphasis the FAA has placed on managing 

people within the past two years (item 64) to a high of 33% 

positive for satisfaction with recognition (item 11). 

When specifically asked if it was common to hear “jobwell-done” (item 14), ATO employees and FAA employees, 

as a whole, reported 30% and 35% positive, respectively. 

These rates are in stark contrast to those provided by 

ATO-D (19%) and ATO-E (21%). ATO-D and ATO-E 

provided the lowest percent-positive response rates for 

satisfaction with recognition (item 11; 25%, respectively). 

ATO-D provided the lowest percent-positive ratings for 

items 64 and 66, positive change in emphasis on managing people (7%) and interest in employee welfare (16%). 

ATO-E was lowest for items 15 and 16, promotions are 

given to the well qualified (11%) and rewards are based on 

merit (13%), as well as for item 69, people get the credit 

they deserve (15%).

Support service unit employees provided the highest 

percent-positive rates for the commitment to people items: 

ATO-P (item 11; 56%), ATO-P and ATO-S (item 16; 

35%, respectively), ATO-S and ATO-P (item 14; 52%, 

respectively), ATO-S (item 15; 37%), ATO-A (item 64; 

24%), and ATO-F (items 66 and 69; 50% and 56%, 

respectively).

Fiscal Responsibility. Efficiently working within a 

constrained budget is a challenge for many organizations 

within the FAA. Utilizing metrics to improve performance within the ATO is central to effective operations. 

Overall, 19% of ATO employees agreed that information collected on the workgroup was used to improve 

the workgroup’s performance (item 80); 38% agreed that 

policies are adequately communicated (item 90), and 72% 

of ATO employees agreed that their workgroup had the 

knowledge and skills to be effective in their jobs (item 97). 

Across service units, percent-positive responses for workgroup knowledge and skills ranged from a low of 69% in 

ATO-A to a high of 86% in ATO-S. ATO-E reported 

the lowest levels of agreement for item 80 (13%), and 

ATO-E and ATO-D reported the lowest percent positive 

for item 90 (32%, respectively), while ATO-S reported 

the highest levels of agreement on items 80 and 90 (47% 

and 54%, respectively). 

DISCUSSION

The ATO is a sub-set of the FAA that comprises the 

majority of the FAA population. As such, their scores 

on the EAS 2003 are similar in many ways to the FAA 

overall. Further, the operations service units within the 

ATO make up the bulk of the ATO and, therefore, have 

a greater impact on the results of the EAS 2003 than did 

the support service units. In general, employees within 

the ATO operations service units reported fewer favorable 

responses on most of the core value items than did the 

support service units. This difference has been evident 

in data obtained from past administrations of the EAS, 

with individuals closer to operations at headquarters 

perceiving the organization as functioning better than 

individuals working in field operations. This was particularly true for items related to integrity and honesty, 

accountability and responsibility, and commitment to 

people. Indeed, En Route and Oceanic (ATO-E) and 

Flight Services (ATO-D) operations personnel provided 

the lowest percent-positive response rates for the majority 

of items across all core value areas. Within the past year, 

the possibility of privatization or contracting out services 

within some Air Traffic organizations has been a heated 

point of discussion. It may be that negative responses and 

comments made on the EAS, particularly within Flight 

Services, reflect feelings regarding this possibility (King, 

Cruz, Jack, Thomas, & Hackworth, in press). 

Some of the least favorable areas for the operations 

service units included conflict management, taking corrective action with poorly performing employees (supervisors and non-supervisors), seeing a positive change 

in the emphasis the FAA has put on managing people 

in the last two years, promotions going to those who 

are well-qualified, and recognition and rewards being 

based on merit. Within the support service units, some 

of the least favorable areas also included taking corrective 

actions with poorly performing employees (supervisors 
8

and non-supervisors) and seeing a positive change in the 

emphasis the FAA has put on managing people in the 

last two years.

Failing to take corrective actions with poor performers and promoting individuals who are not well qualified creates an environment of unfairness and inequity. 

Moreover, improved conflict management, fairness in 

promotions, and correcting poorly performing supervisors and managers would likely be associated with the 

perception of a positive change in the emphasis the FAA 

places on managing people. 

Each of these represents complex problem areas that 

must be managed if the ATO is going to be a truly successful PBO. In response to the EAS 2003 results, the 

FAA administrator recently initiated a program geared at 

addressing conflicts through the Early Dispute Resolution 

Center. Additionally, there are concerted efforts by FAA 

management to examine internal communication within 

the agency with the assistance of an outside consulting firm 

(FAA, 2004b). The ATO is also developing its own EAS 

Action Plan, focusing on improving selected EAS items 

with positive response rates below 40% and documenting successes (i.e., best practices) for items with positive 

response rates above 55% (FAA, 2004c).

It should be noted that the data in this report represent 

a post-hoc consolidation of EAS data for the newly formed 

ATO. As such, the data were not collected in a way that 

allowed employees to indicate their ATO service unit or to 

answer the questions in the context of the ATO. Because 

of these limitations, caution is warranted in generalizing 

these data. In spite of this, the data presented here represent the best-possible baseline for comparison to future 

EAS data for the ATO. The baseline data illuminate areas 

that should be targeted for improvement through specific 

action plans and well-defined communications. The next 

EAS administration is tentatively scheduled for 2006 

and may reveal whether employees in the ATO perceive 

positive or negative changes in their work environment 

within the targeted areas.

ENDNOTES

1 Small numbers of employees from other staff organizations were also 

included in the reorganization.

2 ATO-C was not formed by moving entire offices into the new service 

unit; therefore, CAMI personnel could not create an EAS 2003 dataset 

for this service unit. 

REFERENCES

ACSI (2003). American Customer Satisfaction Index. Retrieved July 29, 2004, from http://www.theacsi.org/

government/govt-03.html.

FAA (2004a). ATO Implementation Strategy version 

1.3. Retrieved September 17, 2004, from http:

//ato.faa.gov/DesktopModules/ViewDocument. 

aspx?DocumentID=85.

FAA (2004b). Communicating the Future Within 

the Federal Aviation Administration. Review of 

Findings from Summer 2004 Internal Research. 

Presented by Insidedge. Retrieved September 23, 

2004, from http://employees.faa.gov/news/front_

page/FAA_research_review.htm.

FAA (2004c). FY 2003 Employee Attitude Survey ATO 

Plan of Action April 27, 2004 (updated July 9, 

2004) retrieved September 23, 2004, from http:

//ato.faa.gov/DesktopModules/ViewDocument. 

aspx?DocumentID=91.

FAA (2004d). What is a PBO? Retrieved July 29, 2004, 

from www.ato.faa.gov/Desktopdefault.aspx?tab 

index=5&tabid=15&Itemid=132.

FAA (2004e). Workshops Are Helping Managers Help 

Us: Understanding Change and Moving Forward. 

Retrieved July 29, 2004, from www.ato.faa.gov/

DeskTopDefault.aspx?tabindex=2&tabid=22& 

itemid=327.

King, S. J., Cruz, C., Jack, D. G., Thomas, S., & 

Hackworth, C. (In press). 2003 Employee attitude 

survey analysis of employee comments. (DOT/FAA/

AM-in press). Washington, DC: Federal Aviation 

Administration Office of Aerospace Medicine.

Morgan, D., & Zeffane, R. (2003). Employee involvement, organizational change and trust in management. International Journal of Human Resource 

Management, 14(1), 55-75.
APPENDIX A

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit

The ATO Service Units listed in this appendix are organized by function (i.e., support, operational). Support service units 

include: Finance (ATO-F), Acquisition and Business Services (ATO-A), Safety (ATO-S), and Operations Planning (ATO-P). 

Operational service units include: Terminal (ATO-T), En Route and Oceanic (ATO-E), Flights Services (ATO-D), System 

Operations (ATO-R), and Technical Operations (ATO-W). Following each service unit’s acronym are the pre-ATO routing 

symbols as they appeared on the 2003 Employee Attitude Survey (EAS).

Support Functions

ATO-F

AFZ-400

AOZ-10

ASD-300

ATX-300

ATO-A

AAF-60

ABZ-1 to 6

ABZ-200

ABZ-300

ACA-1

AFZ-1 to 7

AFZ-100

AFZ-200

AFZ-300

ARA-1 to 5

ASU-1

ASU-10

ASU-100

ASU-200

ASU-300

ASU-400

ASU-500

ATS-1 to 9

ATX-100

ATX-200

ATX-400

ATX-500

ATO-S

AAT-100

AAT-120

AAT-130

AAT-140

AAT-150

ACM-1

ACM-10

ARI-200

ATQ-1 to 4

Axx-1R

ATO-P

AAR-1 to 10

AAR-100

AAR-200

AAR-400

AAT-30

ACB-1

ACB-100

ACB-200

ACB-3

ACB-300

ACB-400

ACB-500

ACB-600

ACB-700

ACB-800

ACF-1

ACH-1

ACK-1

ACM-20

ACT-1

ACT-4

ACX-1

ACX-20

ACX-3

ACX-30

ACX-4

ACX-40

ACX-5

ACX-50

ACX-60

AND-500

AOZ-40

ARQ-1 to 3

ARQ-100

ARQ-200

ARQ-300

ARS-100

ASC-1 to 200

ASD-100

ASD-400

ASD-500

ASD-600

Operational Functions

ATO-T

510 FSDPS

A11

A80

A90

ABE

ABI

ABQ

ACE-500

ACE-505

ACE-510

ACE-520

ACE-530

ACE-540

ACK

ACT

ACY

ADS

ADW

AEA-500

AEA-505

AEA-510

AEA-520

AEA-530

AEA-540

AFW

AGC

AGL-500

AGL-505

AGL-510

AGL-520

AGL-530

AGL-540

AGS

ALB

ALO

AMA

ANC

APA

APC

ARB

ARR

ASE

ASR-1 to 4

ASR-100

ASR-200

ATA-400

ATB-1 to 10

ATB-100s

ATB-20

ATB-200

ATB-30/A

ATB-300

ATB-400

ATP-100 to 140

ATP-400 to 430

AUS

AVL

AVN-1 to 2

AVN-100

AVN-110

AVN-120

AVN-130

AVN-140

AVN-160

AVN-170

AVN-20

A1
A2 

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit 

ATO-T

AVN-200

AVN-210

AVN-220

AVN-230

AVN-250

AVN-3/4/5/7

AVN-300

AVN-310 to 316

AVN-320 to 328

AVN-330 to 333

AVN-340 to 347

AVN-40

AVN-500

AVN-502

AVN-503

AVN-510

AVN-511

AVN-512

AVN-513

AVN-514

AVN-520

AVN-521

AVN-522

AVN-523

AVN-524

AVN-530

AVN-531

AVN-6

AVN-600

AVP

AWP-500 to 507

AWP-510

AWP-520

AWP-530

AWP-540

AZO

BDL

BED

BFI

BFL

BGM

BGR

BHM

BIL

BIS

BJC

BNA

BOI

BOS

BPT

BTR

BTV

BUF

BUR

BWI

C90

CAE

CAK

CCR

CDW

CHA

CHS

CID

CKB

CLE

CLT

CMA

CMH

CMI

CNO

COS

CPR

CPS

CRP

CRQ

CRW

CVG

D01

D10

D21

DAB

DAL

DAY

DCA

DEN

DFW

DLH

DPA

DSM

DTW

DVT

DWH

E10

ELM

ELP

EMT

ERI

EUG

EVV

EWR

FAI

FAR

FAT

FAY

FCM

FFZ

FLL

FLO

FNT

FPR

FRG

FSD

FSM

FTW

FWA

FXE

GCN

GEG

GFK

GGG

GPT

GRB

GRR

GSO

GSP

GTF

HCF

HEF

HIO

HLN

HOU

HPN

HSV

HTS

HUF

HWD

I90

IAD

IAH

ICT

ILG

ILM

IND

ISP

ITO

JAN

JAX

JFK

JNU

K90

KWA

L30

LAF

LAN

LAS

LAX

LBB

LCH

LEX

LFT

LGA

LGB

LIT

LNK

LOU

LVK

M98

MAF

MBS

MCI

MCO

MDT

MDW

MEM

MFD

MGM

MHT

MIA

MIC

MKC

MKE

MKG

MLI

MLU

MMU
A3

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit

ATO-T (Continued)

MOB

MRI

MRY

MSN

MSP

MSY

MWH

MYF

MYR

N90

NCT

NEW

NMM

OAK

OGG

OKC

OMA

ONT

ORD

ORF

ORL

P31

P50

P80

PAE

PAO

PBI

PCT

PDK

PDX

PHF

PHL

PHX

PIA

PIE

PIT

PNE

PNS

POC

POU

PRC

PSC

PSP

PTK

PUB

PVD

PWK

PWM

R90

RDG

RDU

RFD

RHV

RIC

RME

RNO

ROA

ROC

ROW

RST

RSW

RVS

S46

S56

SAN

SAT

SAV

SBA

SBN

SCK

SCT

SDF

SDL

SEA

SEE

SFB

SFO

SGF

SHV

SJC

SJU

SLC

SMF

SMO

SNA

SPI

SRQ

STL

STP

STS

STT

SUS

SUX

SYR

T75

TEB

TLH

TMB

TOL

TPA

TRI

TUL

TUS

TVC

TWF

TYS

U90

VGT

VNY

VRB

Y90

YIP

YNG

ATO-E

AAT-200

ADA-1 to 70

ANM-500

ANM-505

ANM-510

ANM-520

ANM-530

ANM-540

AOP-600

AOS-300/301

AOS-310

AOS-320

AOS-330

AOS-340

AOS-350

AOS-360

AOS-370

AOZ-1 to 9

AOZ-500

ARU-100

ASO-500

ASO-505

ASO-510

ASO-520

ASO-530

ASO-540

ASW-500

ASW-505

ASW-510

ASW-520

ASW-530

ASW-540

AUA-1 to 6

AUA-10

AUA-200

AUA-600

ZAB

ZAN

ZAU

ZBW

ZDC

ZDV

ZFW

ZHU

ZID

ZJX

ZKC

ZLA

ZLC

ZMA

ZME

ZMP

ZNY

ZOA

ZOB

ZSE

ZSU

ZTL

ZUA
A4 

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit 

ATO-D

AAL-500

AAL-510

AAL-530

AAL-540

ABQ AFSS

ANB AFSS

AND AFSS

ANE-500

ANE-510

tANE-520

ANE-530

ANE-540

AOO AFSS

ARS-1 to 7

ARS-10

ARU-1 to 4

ARU-300

ASD-1 to 3

ATP-1 to 4

ATP-300 to 320

AUA-400

BDR AFSS

BGR AFSS

BNA AFSS

BOI AFSS

BTV AFSS

BUF AFSS

CDC AFSS

CDC FSDPS

CLE AFSS

COU AFSS

CPR AFSS

CXO AFSS

DAY AFSS

DCA AFSS

DEN AFSS

DEN FSDPS

DRI AFSS

EKN AFSS

ENA AFSS

ENA FSDPS

FAI AFSS

FOD AFSS

FTW AFSS

GFK FSS

GNV AFSS

GNV FSDPS

GRB AFSS

GTF AFSS

GWO AFSS

HHR AFSS

HNL AFSS

HOM FSS

HON AFSS

HUF AFSS

ICT AFSS

IKK AFSS

IPT AFSS

ISP IFSS

JBR AFSS

JNU AFSS

KTN FSS

LAN AFSS

LOU AFSS

MCN AFSS

MCN FSDPS

MIA AIFSS

MIA FSDPS

MIV AFSS

MKL AFSS

MKL FSDPS

MLC AFSS

MMV AFSS

OAK AIFSS

OLU AFSS

OME FSS

PAQ FSS

PIE AFSS

PNM AFSS

PRC AFSS

RAL AFSS

RDU AFSS

RIU AFSS

RNO AFSS

SAN AFSS

SEA AFSS

SEA FSDPS

SIT FSS

SJT AFSS

SJU AIFSS

STL AFSS

ZHU FSDPS

ATO-R

AAT-1 to 3

AAT-20

ARS-20 to 23

ARS-200

ARU-200

ATA-1 to 8/12

ATA-10

ATA-100

ATA-110

ATA-200

ATA-300/301

ATP-10

ATP-200/202

ATT-1 to 3

ATT-100 to 130

ATT-200 to 240

ATX-1 to 4

ATX-10

AUA-700

ATO-W

A80 Auto/Comm/TM&O SSC

A80 Environmental SSC

A80 Systems Ops SSC

AAF-1 to 6

AAF-10

AAF-20 to 22

AAF-50

AAL-400 to 410

AAL-420

AAL-470

Abilene SSC

ACE-400 to 410

ACE-420

ACE-470

AEA-400 to 410

AEA-420

AEA-470

AFZ-500

AFZ-600

AFZ-700

AFZ-800

AGL-400 to 410

AGL-420

AGL-470

Albuquerque SSC

Allegheny County SSC

Allentown SSC

ALO SSC

Amarillo SSC

Anchorage SSC

AND-1 to 6

AND-200

AND-300

AND-700

Andrews (ADW) SSC

ANE-400 to 410

ANE-420

ANE-470

Angel Peak LRR

ANI-1/2/6

ANI-100

ANI-120

ANI-130/160

ANI-140

ANI-150/170

ANI-180

ANI-200

ANI-220

ANI-230

ANI-240

ANI-250

ANI-260

ANI-270

ANI-280

ANI-3 to 90

ANI-300

ANI-320

ANI-330

ANI-340

ANI-350

ANI-360

ANI-370

ANI-380

ANI-400

ANI-420

ANI-430

ANI-440

ANI-450

ANI-460
A5

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit

ANI-470

ANI-480

ANI-500

ANI-522

ANI-530

ANI-540

ANI-550

ANI-560/570

ANI-600

ANI-620

ANI-630

ANI-640

ANI-650

ANI-660

ANI-670

ANI-680

ANI-700

ANI-720

ANI-730/770

ANI-740/750

ANI-760/780

ANI-800

ANI-820

ANI-830

ANI-840

ANI-850

ANI-860

ANI-870

ANI-880

ANI-900

ANI-920

ANI-930

ANI-940

ANI-950

ANI-960

ANM-400 to 410

ANM-420

ANM-470

AOP-1 to 20

AOP-100

AOP-1000

AOP-200

AOP-30

AOP-300

AOP-400

AOP-500

AOP-700

AOP-800

AOP-900

AOS-1

AOS-10

AOS-100

AOS-20

AOS-200/201

AOS-21

AOS-22

AOS-220

AOS-230

AOS-240

AOS-250

AOS-260

AOS-270

AOS-305

AOS-500/501

AOS-510 to 513

AOS-520

AOS-530

AOS-540

AOS-550

AOS-700

AOS-800

AOS-900

Arcata SSC

Arctic Central Radar (ACR) SSC

ARN-1 to 3

ARN-100

ARN-200

Asheville SSC

ASO-400/401

ASO-410

ASO-420

ASO-470

ASW-400 to 410

ASW-420

ASW-470

ATL Albany SSC

ATL SMO

Atlanta ATCT Facility Office

Atlanta Environmental SSC

Atlanta Nav/Comm SSC

Atlanta NNCC Facility Office

Atlanta NNCC Systems Management SSC

Atlanta NNCC Systems Ops SSC

Atlanta Radar/ARTS SSC

Atlantic City SSC

Austin SSC

Automated Data SSC

AWP-400 to 410

AWP-420

AWP-470

Bakersfield SSC

Baltimore (BWI) SSC

Bangor, Maine SSC

Baton Rouge SSC

Bay SSC

BCT SSC

Bering Sea SSC

Billings SSC

Birmingham SSC

BLV SSC -Belleville

Boise SSC

Boron SSC

Boston A SSC - 83CB

Boston B SSC - 83DB

Bradley SSC

BRR SSC

Buffalo SSC

Burlington SSC

CAE Charleston SSC

CAE SMO

Canton SSC (CAK)

Casper SSC

CBS PSO

CBS SMO

CBS TSO

Central Arizona SSC

Central Minnesota SSC

Charlotte SSC

Chattanooga SSC

CHI PSU

CHI SMO

CHI TSU

CID SSC

Clarksburg SSC

Cleveland SSC (CLE)

CMI SSC -Champaign

Colorado Springs SSC

Columbia Basin SSC

Columbia SSC

Columbus SSC

Columbus SSC (CMH)

Corpus Christi SSC

COU SSC

Covington SSC

D10 Service Operations Center

Dallas/Addison SSC

Dayton SSC (DAY)

Daytona Beach SSC

Detroit Metro (DTWA-Radar) SSC

Detroit Metro (DTWB Environmental) SSC

Detroit Metro (DTW-NAV COM) SSC

DFW ARTS SSC

DFW Comm SSC

DFW Environmental SSC

DFW Navigation SSC

DFW Radar SSC

DIA - Environmental SSC

DIA - NAV/COM SSC

DIA - Radar/ARTS SSC

DMS PSS

DMS SMO

DMS TSS

DSM SSC

DTS PSU

DTS SMO

DTS TSU

Dubois SSC

Dulles (IAD) SSC

DuPage SSC (DPA)

Edwards SSC

El Paso SSC

ELG ARTS/IFD SSC

ELG ENV SSC

Elmira SSC

Empire (QJA) SSC

Enroute SOC (ESOC)

Erie SSC

Eugene SSC

EVV SSC -Evansville

Fairbanks International SSC

Fallon SSC

Fayetteville SSC

Flagstaff SSU

FOD SSC

ATO-W (Continued)
A6 

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit 

Fresno SSC

Ft Lauderdale SSC

Ft Myers SSC

Ft Smith/Fayetteville SSC (FSM/FYV)

FWA SSC -Ft Wayne

Gainesville SSC

GCK SSC

GGA PSU

GGA SMO

GGA SMO Automation SSC

GGA SMO Environmental SSC

GGA TSU

Glacier SSC

GLF SMO

GPL SMO

Grand Forks SSC

Grand Junction SSC

Grand Rapid (GRR) SSC

Great Basin SSC

Great Falls SSC

Green Bay (GRB) SSC

Greensboro SSC

Greenwood SSC

Greer SSC

GRI SSC

GTW SMO

Guam SSC

Gulfport SSC

Herndon ATCSCC (DC) SSC

High Sites SSC

Hilo SSC

HIP PSS

HIP SMO

HIP TSS

Hobby SSC

Houston Environmental SSC

Hudson (HUD) SSC

Huntsville SSC

HUT SSC

Hyannis SSC

IAH-A SSC

IAH-B SSC

ICT SSC

IND Albany SSC

IND PSO

IND SMO

IND SSC -Indianapolis

IND TSO

Inyokern SSC

Jackson SSC

Jacksonville SSC

Kalamazoo (AZO) SSC

Kauai SSC

Kenai SSC

Kennedy (JFK) SSC

Ketchikan SSC

Knoxville SSC

Kona SSC

Lafayette SSC

LaGuardia (LGA) SSC

Lake Charles SSC

Lake Huron (LHN) SSC

Las Vegas Environmental SSC

Las Vegas N/R/C SSC

LAX Environmental SSC

LAX OPS Area

LAX Ops Support Ctr SSC

LAX Radar/Nav/Com SSC

LBF SSC

Leesburg AFSS (JYO) SSC

Lexington SSC

LIB PSO

LIB SMO

LIB TSO

Little Rock/Jonesboro SSC (LIT/JBR)

Little Rock/Russellville SSC (LIT/QXR)

LNK SSC

Long Island (ISP) SSC

Longmont Environmental SSC

Long-Range Radar SSC

Longview/Tyler SSC (GGG/TYR)

Louisville SSC

LSS SMO

Lubbock SSC

Macon SSC

Madison (MSN) SSC

Manchester SSC

Marquette (MQT) SSC

Martinsburg SSC

Maui SSC

MCI SSC

Meacham/Alliance SSC

Melbourne SSC

MEM SMO

Memphis SSC

Mesa SSC

Metro SSC (MDW)

MGM SMO

MIA/SJU SMO

Miami ATCT Facility Office

Miami Enroute SSC

Miami Environmental SSC

Miami Nav/Comm SSC

Miami Radar/Data SSC

Middletown SSC

Midland SSC

Milwaukee (MKE NAV/COM/ENV) SSC

Milwaukee (MKEA RADAR/ARTS) SSC

Minneapolis Environmental SSC (MSP ENV)

Minneapolis RADAR SSC

MKC SSC

MLI SSC -Moline

Mobile SSC

Moisant ENV SSC

Monterey SSC

Montgomery SSC

Myrtle Beach SSC

NA SMO

NAS Communications/ENV SSC

NAS Data Processing SSC

Nashville SSC

NCT - Auto/Data SSC

NCT - ENV/COMM SSC

NCT FM

NCT Systems Ops SSC

New Haven SSC

New Orleans SSC

Newark (EWR) SSC

NNCC Systems Management SSC

NNCC Systems Operations SSC

Norfolk (ORF) SSC

North Bay SSC

North Georgia SSC

Northern California TRACON (NCT)

Northern Minnesota SSC

Northern Nevada SSC

Northwest Alaska (NWA) SSC

Northwest Dakota SSC

Northwest Oregon SSC

NY ARTCC

NY ARTCC AUTO SSC

NY ARTCC IFD/ENV SSC

NY ARTCC OPS SSC

NY TRACON

NY TRACON Electronics SSC

NY TRACON OPS/ENV SSC

Oahu NAV/COMM/ENV (NCE) SSC

Oahu Radar/Automation/Data (RAD) SSC

Oakland SSC

OHI PSS

OHI SMO

OHI TSS

OKC NAVCOM SSC (OKC N/C)

OKC Radar/Environ SSC (OKC R/E)

OMA SSC

Ontario Environment SSC

Ontario NAS Electronics SSC

Orange Empire SSC

ORD COMM SSC

ORD ENV SSC

ORD NAS/NAV SSC

ORD RADAR SSC

Orlando SSC

Palm Springs SSC

Paso Robles SSC

PDS PSU

PDS SMO

PDS TSU

Pensacola SSC

Philadelphia N/C/E SSC

Philadelphia R/A SSC

Phoenix Operations Area

PIA SSC -Peoria

PIT Charleston SSC

PIT PSO

PIT SMO

PIT TSO

Pittsburgh SSC

PNW PSO

PNW SMO

PNW TSO

Portland SSC

Portland, Maine SSC

Potomac Tracon

ATO-W (Continued)
A7

The Pre-ATO Routing Symbols That Make Up Each Newly Created ATO Service Unit

Potomac Tracon Auto/Data SSC

Potomac Tracon ENV/COMM SSC

Potomac Tracon OPS Group

Prescott SSC

Providence SSC

Puerto Rico Radar/Comm SSC

Puerto Rico SSC

QUU SSC

RADAR/DATA/COMM SSC

Raleigh SSC

Reagan-National (DCA) SSC

Red Bluff SSC

Red River SSC

Reno R/C SSU

Reno SSC

Richmond (RIC) SSC

RIO SMO

RKM PSO

RKM SMO

RKM SOC

RKM TSO

Roanoke SSC

Rochester SSC

Rockford SSC (RFD)

Roswell SSC

RRR SMO

SA SMO

SA SMO Automation SSC

SA SMO Environmental SSC

Sacramento Environmental SSC

Sacramento Nav/Comm SSC

Salt Lake City ARTCC Operations

Samoa SSC

San Antonio SSC

San Diego Nav/Com SSC

San Diego Radar SSC

San Francisco SSC

San Joaquin Valley SSC

San Jose SSC

San Juan Facility Office

San Juan SSC

Santa Barbara SSC

Sarasota SSC

SATCOM SSC

Savannah SSC

SBN SSC -South Bend

SCT Environmental SSC

SCT NAS Electronics SSC

SCT SOC

Seattle ARTCC (ZSE)

Seattle Radar/AUTO SSC

Seattle SSC

SGF SSC

Shreveport/Monroe SSC (SHV/MLU)

Sky Harbor SSC

SLC PSO

SLC SMO

SLC TSO

SNE PSO

SNE SMO

SNE TSO

SOC SSC

Southeast Dakota SSC

Southeast Minnesota SSC

Southern Arizona SSC

Southern California TRACON (SCT)

Southern Oregon SSC

Southwest Alaska (SWA) SSC

Southwest Dakota SSC

SPI SSC -Springfield

Spokane SSC

SRN PSU

SRN SMO

SRN TSU

STL NAV SSC

STL RAD SSC

SUP PSU

SUP SMO

SUP TSU

SUS SSC

Syracuse SSC

T-75 TRACON SSC

Tallahassee SSC

Tampa SSC

Terminal SOC (TSOC)

Teton SSC

Texarkana/Barksdale SSC (TXK/BAD)

Toledo SSC (TOL)

TPA SMO

Trenton SSC

Tri-Cities SSC

TSS PSO

TSS SMO

TSS TSO

Tulsa SSC (TUL SSC)

Turnagain SSC

Utah SSC

Valley SSC

Waco SSC

Wasatch SSC

Washington ARTCC

Washington ARTCC Auto/Display SSC

Washington ARTCC IFD/ENV SSC

Washington ARTCC OPS SSC

West Palm Beach SSC

Western Washington SSC

Wilkes-Barre SSC

Wilmington SSC

WJF SSC

XOA PSO

XOA SMO

XOA TSO

Ypsilanti SSC (YIP)

ZAB Automation SSC

ZAB Communications SSC

ZAB Environmental SSC

ZAB SOC

ZAU AUTO/DATA SSC

ZAU DATA/COMM SSC

ZAU ENV SSC

ZBW-A SSC - 862B (COMM/TM&O)

ZBW-B SSC 863B (Environmental)

ZBW-C SSC - 864B (RDP)

ZBW-D SSC - 861B (NAS Systems Ops)

ZFW Automation SSC

ZFW Comm SSC

ZFW Environmental SSC

ZFW Service Operations Center

ZHN SOC

ZHU Automation SSC

ZHU Communications SSC

ZHU Environmental SSC

ZHU System Operations SSC

ZID AUTO SSC

ZID COMM SSC

ZID INF SSC

ZID SOC

ZJX Automation SSC

ZJX Data/Comm SSC

ZJX Environmental SSC

ZJX Facility Office

ZJX Systems Ops SSC

ZKC ASP SSC

ZKC ENV SSC

ZKC NET SSC

ZKC SOC SSC

ZLA Automation SSC

ZLA Environmental SSC

ZLA T-Comm SSC

ZMA Automation SSC

ZMA Data/Comm SSC

ZMA Environmental SSC

ZMA Facility Office

ZMA Systems Ops SSC

ZME Automation SSC

ZME Data/Comm SSC

ZME Environmental SSC

ZME Systems Ops SSC

ZMP Data SSC

ZMP Environmental SSC

ZMP SOC SSC

ZOA IFD SSC

ZOA Systems Ops SSC

ZOB ADP SSC

ZOB ENV SSC

ZOB IFD SSC

ZOB SOC

ZSE Automation SSC

ZSE Communications SSC

ZSE Environmental SSC

ZTL Automation SSC

ZTL Data/Comm SSC

ZTL Environmental SSC

ZTL Facility Office

ATO-W (Continued)