U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

95–362 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–669 

NEXTGEN: A REVIEW OF PROGRESS, CHALLENGES, 

AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVING 

AVIATION SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, 

SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JUNE 25, 2014 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

CORY BOOKER, New Jersey 

JOHN E. WALSH, Montana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Ranking 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

DAN COATS, Indiana 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

ELLEN L. DONESKI, Staff Director 

JOHN WILLIAMS, General Counsel 

DAVID SCHWIETERT, Republican Staff Director 

NICK ROSSI, Republican Deputy Staff Director 

REBECCA SEIDEL, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chairman 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

CORY BOOKER, New Jersey 

JOHN E. WALSH, Montana 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire, Ranking 

Member 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on June 25, 2014 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Ayotte ................................................................................... 3 

Statement of Senator Booker .................................................................................. 32 

Statement of Senator Begich .................................................................................. 34 

Statement of Senator Nelson .................................................................................. 36 

WITNESSES

Hon. Michael G. Whitaker, Deputy Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration ................................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Matthew E. Hampton, Assistant Inspector General for Aviation Audits, Office 

of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation ............................... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

Paul Rinaldi, President, National Air Traffic Controllers Association ............... 17 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 19 

Gary Beck, Vice President—Flight Operations, Alaska Airlines ......................... 25 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26 

APPENDIX

Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Michael G. Whitaker by: 

Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV ............................................................................ 43 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 43 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 47 

Response to written question submitted to Gary Beck by: 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 47 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 48 

(1) 

NEXTGEN: A REVIEW OF PROGRESS, 

CHALLENGES, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR 

IMPROVING AVIATION SAFETY AND 

EFFICIENCY 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND

SECURITY, 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m. in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Maria Cantwell, 

Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. The Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation will come to order. This is an Aviation 

Subcommittee, and we are having a hearing today on ‘‘NextGen: A 

Review of the Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities for Improving Aviation Safety and Efficiency.’’ 

I want to thank the witnesses for being here today, the Honorable Michael Whitaker, who is Deputy Administrator for the FAA. 

Welcome. 

Mr. Matthew Hampton, Assistant Inspector General for Aviation 

Audits, in the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation. 

Mr. Paul Rinaldi, President of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. Welcome. 

Mr. Gary Beck, Vice President—Flight Operations, Alaska Airlines. I do not know if that means you live in the Northwest, but 

if that is indeed the case, welcome, and thank you for being here. 

Senator BOOKER. It does not matter where he lives, he has got 

a great haircut. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CANTWELL. Just like yours. OK. Today, we are here to 

discuss the Next Generation Air Traffic System, more commonly 

known as ‘‘NextGen,’’ and this program has been promised as a 

way to increase safety, improve efficiency, reduce fuel costs, by reforming our air traffic control system. 

A fully implemented NextGen system is also critical for building 

capacity in our aviation system to meet the demands of a growing 

2 

middle class around the globe and the increase in air transportation. 

There is a lot to do to achieve these goals. Five billion has been 

invested in NextGen thus far, and it has as the I.G. Report says 

produced some milestones being met, but as the report shows, 

there are also issues related to the ASD–B program, a cornerstone 

of the technology, and underlying problematic challenges, and an 

executable plan for coordinating many of the multiple programs 

and the technical issues. 

So, we will look forward to hearing more from the IG Report. 

We are expected to continue to invest $1 billion a year in 

NextGen, and there have been some delays in this implementation 

that we need to push beyond. It is unacceptable for us to continue 

to spend resources and not make more progress as it relates to the 

flying public. 

We have asked the private sector, commercial air carriers, cargo 

and general aviation, to make real investments in helping us meet 

the promise of NextGen, but we have little data and metrics to assess the value of that investment. 

We had created a NextGen Advisory Committee in the last FAA 

reauthorization bill to help the FAA get back on track. Thanks to 

many people, including Alaska Airlines’ CEO, Bill Ayer, who have 

made progress on helping us keep the implementation of key priorities. 

But a lot of work still remains. The NextGen Advisory Committee has said the FAA should focus on key areas, including runway operations, Performance Based Navigation, surface operations, 

and data communications. 

These four priorities represent consensus between the industry 

and the FAA where optimum progress can be made in the shortest 

amount of time. 

I cannot emphasize how important I believe that is. When you 

see the progress that has been made from Greener Skies, you certainly think why can we not get this as a model that could be replicated more quickly airport to airport or region to region, having 

learned all the pluses—challenges with implementation, thereby 

flattening some of those and making it easier for the next airport 

to implement. So, I certainly hope that this is one of the priorities 

we will move on faster. 

This will deliver maximum return on investment for the taxpayers and the airline industry, and improve the service to the flying public. 

The FAA has promised a report on the path forward for many 

of the priorities. We look forward to getting that, I believe this 

July, so we will have a chance to ask a little bit about that today, 

on data communications and the improvements that are supposed 

to be made between air traffic controllers and the commercial pilots, the Performance Based Navigation system, using GPS, the 

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, ADS–B, and a variety of other issues about the traveling public and their smoother, 

shorter flights. 

Obviously, we know that NextGen has the promise of an estimated 1.6 billion gallons of fuel savings by 2020, and this will help 

airlines invest in newer, more fuel efficient, safer planes, which is 

3 

also good for domestic manufacturing, and good for our environment. 

We all understand that investments must be made in infrastructure before associated capabilities and benefits are realized, and 

that is why, Deputy Administrator Whitaker, I appreciate your 

leadership and what you have brought to the agency to bring focus 

to this. 

We know there are many challenges you face in implementing a 

whole new system in the existing culture. 

So, we are all here to help focus on these issues today, and hope 

that we can prioritize some of these investments. 

One of the areas I mentioned is the implementation of the 

Greener Skies initiative in Seattle where Alaska Airlines partnered 

with Seattle, Boeing, the FAA, and leveraged Alaska’s pioneering 

efforts on NextGen and Performance Based Navigation. 

Today, there are more Performance Based Navigation procedures 

in use than conventional routes, and Alaska’s private investment 

in research in this field has benefited passengers throughout the 

nation, and it is critical that we continue to fund the research and 

development that will help achieve these technically complex capabilities and long-term goals. 

I look forward to hearing from all the witnesses today on this important endeavor that we are undertaking. Again, thank you all for 

your contribution, and now I will turn to the Ranking Member, 

Senator Ayotte, for her opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KELLY AYOTTE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. I want to thank the Chair of the 

Committee for holding this important hearing. 

We can all agree that the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System, or NextGen, has the potential to significantly enhance our 

Nation’s antiquated air traffic system by making our air traffic 

management more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and 

most importantly, safer for the traveling public. 

There is no doubt that NextGen seeks to reform an extraordinarily complex air traffic management system. However, as we 

will discuss today, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation Inspector General, the Federal Government has already 

spent between $5 billion to $6 billion to build the foundational elements of NextGen, work that has been ongoing since 2003. 

While recognizing that some progress has been made, I am concerned that we have yet to see many of the tangible results from 

these investments that we are all waiting to see and that we all 

support. 

Specifically, I am concerned that programs critical to the foundation of NextGen have experienced cost increases, performance 

shortfalls, and have failed to meet scheduled deadlines. 

In addition, while I appreciate that some airlines have already 

invested millions of dollars in equipping their aircraft for NextGen, 

it is concerning that they are still waiting to see the benefits of 

these forward thinking investments, and I think some people are 

sitting on the side lines in the airlines industry as well, because 

4 

those who have made investments have not yet seen the return on 

those investments. 

While I look forward to discussing progress today, I also want to 

further identify areas that need improvement, so that we can work 

together toward swift and efficient implementation of NextGen. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about how 

Congress, the FAA, and industry can work together to better address these challenges. 

As we develop the next FAA reauthorization bill, it is critical 

that members of this committee, particularly this subcommittee, 

work together along with our House counterparts, and all the 

stakeholders involved with the FAA to get this right. 

It is too important for the country that we move forward with 

NextGen implementation as fast as we can, that we really get back 

on track, and that we do all we can with all of the great benefits 

that we will see from updating this system. 

So, I thank the Chair for holding this important hearing, and I 

thank the witnesses for being here. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Senator Ayotte. Now, we will go 

to our witnesses. We will start with you, Mr. Whitaker, and just 

go down the line. You each have five minutes. 

If you have a longer statement, we are happy to submit it for the 

record, and that will give us time to really get into the questions. 

So, thank you and welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL G. WHITAKER, DEPUTY 

ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

Mr. WHITAKER. Thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell and Ranking 

Member Ayotte, Senator Booker. I am pleased to have the opportunity to be here and highlight the progress the FAA and industry 

are making with NextGen. 

On June 3, my one year anniversary as the agency’s Chief 

NextGen Officer, I delivered my first annual report to Congress as 

required by the 2012 Reauthorization Act. The report discusses the 

significant progress we are making with NextGen foundational programs and underscores the benefits that NextGen is delivering 

now. 

For example, this year we completed one of the most crucial 

foundational elements of NextGen: the installation of the ground 

infrastructure for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast or 

ADS–B. This represents a key milestone in transitioning from a 

ground based radar system to satellite based GPS technology. 

ADS–B enables us to determine an aircraft’s location and track 

with far greater accuracy than radar. In turn, this allows us more 

precise and efficient spacing of aircraft, which enables airlines to 

take advantage of the fuel savings in NextGen procedures. 

This technology is also improving our ability to perform life saving search and rescue operations. Air traffic controllers have better 

information about an airplane’s last position, thus helping take the 

‘‘search’’ out of ‘‘search and rescue.’’ 

We are also close to completing another major foundational element of NextGen, the software and hardware upgrades to our Nation’s high altitude air traffic centers. The ERAM program will be 

5 

complete next spring, allowing us to decommission the Legacy system. 

Similar upgrades in our approach centers, the TRACONs, also 

are on track and will be completed in the major TRACONs by 2016. 

In all, we are on track and nearing completion of the 

foundational phase of NextGen, the technology upgrades that will 

enable future capabilities to more efficiently and safely manage existing traffic and incorporate new users into the airspace. 

This puts us well on track to having all the ADS–B foundational 

technology completed well before the 2020 mandate for industry to 

equip with ADS–B Out. 

Both the FAA and industry must be held accountable if NextGen 

is to succeed. We are fulfilling our part of the bargain. Airlines and 

general aviation pilots must do their part and equip by the deadline to use the system that we have built. 

Let me be very clear. The 2020 deadline is not going to change. 

We are in a position to achieve this important milestone on time. 

The cost of equipment has come down considerably. There is sufficient maintenance capacity to allow all equipage to occur, in fact, 

waiting to equip might cost more if aircraft owners crowd repair 

stations to get work done on the eve of the deadline. 

In addition to the foundational work, we have also made significant strives in working with the industry to deliver benefits now. 

One of my first actions upon joining the agency was to task a 

NextGen Advisory Committee or NAC, to provide industry consensus on capabilities that may be delivered in the next one to 

three years. 

The NAC responded with a list in September, and since then we 

have worked together to hone in on four NextGen areas that will 

be our priority—Performance Based Navigation, surface operations, 

multiple runway operations, and DataComm. Each of these areas 

can bring benefits to users in the near term. 

We are working with industry to craft milestones, agree on 

metrics, and track our progress on these initiatives. 

Much of this work has already been underway. Just last week, 

Secretary Fox and FAA Administrator Huerta announced the completion of the Houston Metroplex. The Obama administration selected this project as one of 14 high priority infrastructure projects, 

ideal for expedited completion. In 30 months working with industry, we were able to transform Houston’s airspace, thanks to close 

collaboration with labor, environmental streamlining, and concurrent reviews. 

We have flipped the switch on 61 new procedures that take advantage of the precision of GPS technology to untangle the congested airspace shared by multiple airports. These new procedures 

are estimated to save airlines three million gallons of fuel per year 

while reducing carbon emissions by 31,000 metric tons. That is the 

equivalent of removing more than 6,000 cars from the streets of 

Houston. 

We plan to replicate or improve upon these benefits at more than 

a dozen other busy metropolitan areas across the country. 

The FAA is focused on delivering benefits to airspace users today 

while also completing the foundational programs of NextGen. As 

these foundational programs are complete over the next 24 months, 

6 

we are also focusing on the years beyond—the deployment of surface DataComm through 2018, and full ADS–B equipage in 2020. 

We are on track with NextGen, but it is important that we continue to work together, FAA, industry, and Congress, to keep 

NextGen funded and moving forward. By working together, we 

have the ability to transform our nation’s airspace for the benefit 

of generations to come. 

Thank you for the opportunity to be here and I look forward to 

your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Whitaker follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL G. WHITAKER, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Ayotte, members of the Subcommittee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Through NextGen, the FAA is 

changing the way the National Airspace System (NAS) operates to achieve greater 

efficiency and predictability in air travel. NextGen will improve safety and support 

environmental initiatives such as reducing congestion, noise, emissions and fuel consumption through increased efficiency. NextGen will also allow the NAS to expand 

to meet future demand, manage a more complex set of users, and support the economic viability of our country’s aviation system. 

NextGen was a key component of the 2012 FAA Reauthorization. We recently released the Chief NextGen Officer’s Report to Congress detailing the progress we 

have made in NextGen programs and capabilities. Since I became Chief NextGen 

Officer in June 2013, the FAA has made significant progress toward completing the 

technological foundation that allows us to operate the NAS with greater efficiency 

and predictability and reduced environmental impact. We have strengthened our 

partnerships with key stakeholders, coming to an agreement on a set of near-term 

capabilities that both the FAA and industry will concentrate on over the next three 

years. And we have concrete evidence that demonstrates how NextGen works. 

We are on the cusp of finishing several key programs that underpin NextGen. We 

have completed installation of the ground infrastructure for Automatic Dependent 

Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B), the new surveillance system that uses GPS signals 

to determine an aircraft’s location. We are on track to have all 20 en route centers 

operating with En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) by Spring 2015, which 

will replace HOST, the computer system the FAA has been using to control traffic 

in high-altitude airspace since the 1970s. ERAM enables many new NextGen capabilities that could not be accommodated by HOST. 

By the end of 2016, we expect to have made substantial progress deploying Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR), a program that upgrades the automation platform used in FAA facilities that control low-altitude traffic approaching and departing from our Nation’s airports. ERAM and TAMR will be 

coupled with ADS–B and other NextGen programs still in development, such as 

Data Communications and a suite of traffic management and decision support tools, 

to provide new ways to move users safely and efficiently through the NAS. 

NextGen Benefits Are Being Delivered Today 

Passengers are already enjoying the benefits of NextGen through shorter flights, 

better on-time performance and fewer missed connections. Air carriers are saving 

precious minutes and fuel and reducing aircraft exhaust emissions by taking advantage of more precise routing. General aviation pilots and other small aircraft operators are enjoying greater access to more airports across the country, particularly 

during poor weather. And air traffic controllers have access to new tools to help 

them make the critical decisions necessary to keep the world’s busiest airspace system working as safely and efficiently as possible. 

ADS–B 

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) is a key component of 

NextGen, which will move air traffic control (ATC) from a radar-based system to 

a more precise satellite-derived aircraft location system. ADS–B equipment combines an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft avionics, and a ground infrastructure 

to create an accurate surveillance interface between aircraft and ATC. ADS–B proVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
7 

vides air traffic controllers with more accurate information to help keep aircraft 

safely separated in the sky and on runways. 

ADS–B consists of two different services: ADS–B Out and ADS–B In. ADS–B Out 

periodically broadcasts information about each aircraft operating within the NAS, 

such as identification, current position, altitude, and velocity, through an onboard 

transmitter. With ADS–B, controllers get an update of aircraft position almost continuously, compared to every five seconds or longer with radar. The real-time position information provided to controllers through ADS–B Out is, in most cases, more 

accurate than the information available with current radar-based systems. With 

more accurate information, ATC will be able to position and separate aircraft with 

improved precision and timing, which leads to enhanced safety, greater efficiency, 

and ultimately results in a smoother flow of air traffic. 

All users operating in designated airspace must be equipped with ADS–B Out avionics by January 1, 2020. By that date, all aircraft flying in designated airspace 

must be equipped with avionics that meet performance requirements. The designated airspace includes Class A, B, and C airspace, as well as Class E airspace 

areas at or above 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) over the 48 contiguous United 

States and the District of Columbia, excluding the airspace at and below 2,500 feet 

above the surface. This airspace is more complex with relatively diverse users. The 

rule also requires that aircraft operating in the airspace within 30 nautical miles 

(NM) of the Nation’s busiest airports be equipped with ADS–B Out capabilities. This 

will enhance safety, efficiency, and performance around those airports. 

Since ADS–B relies on information transmitted from ADS–B Out equipped aircraft operating in designated airspace, all users operating in that airspace must be 

equipped in order for ATC to rely on it. That is why the FAA has set a firm date 

by which all aircraft operating in designated airspace must be equipped. We made 

a significant investment in ground infrastructure, and now that installation is complete and we are finalizing ADS–B connections to the air traffic control automation 

platforms, industry equipage is necessary for the full benefits of ADS–B technology 

to be achieved. 

While only ADS–B Out is required under the rule, many users are seeing the benefits of universal equipage with ADS–B In and ADS–B Out. ADS–B In technology 

allows pilots to see what air traffic controllers see: displays showing the location of 

aircraft in the sky around them. This creates an environment of shared situation 

awareness that allows for greater safety and efficiency. Traffic and weather information is now being sent directly to the cockpit of properly equipped aircraft. This information alerts them to in-flight hazards and helps prevent accidents. The three 

types of ADS–B broadcast services now deployed are: 

• Traffic Information Service-Broadcast (TIS–B): This air traffic advisory service 

provides the altitude, ground track, speed and distance of aircraft flying in 

radar contact with controllers and within a 15-nautical-mile (nm) radius, up to 

3,500 feet above or below the receiving aircraft’s position. An aircraft equipped 

with ADS–B In can also receive position data directly from other aircraft broadcasting on the same ADS–B Out frequency. In addition, TIS–B enables pilots 

to see aircraft equipped with transponders flying nearby even if those aircraft 

are not equipped with ADS–B Out. 

• Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Rebroadcast (ADS–R): ADS–R takes position 

information received on the ground from universal access transceiver (UAT)- 

equipped aircraft and rebroadcasts it on the 1090 MHz frequency. Likewise, 

ADS–R rebroadcasts 1090 MHz data to UAT users. In concert with TIS–B, 

ADS–R provides all ADS–B In-equipped aircraft with a comprehensive airspace 

and airport surface traffic picture. ADS–R delivers traffic data within a 15-nm 

radius 5,000 feet above or below relative to the receiving aircraft’s position. 

• Flight Information Service-Broadcast (FIS–B): This service broadcasts graphical 

weather to the cockpit based on what ground-based weather radar is detecting. 

In addition, FIS–B broadcasts text-based advisories including Notice to Airmen 

messages and reports on everything from significant weather to thunderstorm 

activity. UAT-equipped general aviation aircraft can receive this information at 

altitudes up to 24,000 feet. 

The costs of TIS–B and FIS–B services are absorbed by the FAA, so NAS users, 

unlike in the airspace controlled by other Air Navigation Service Providers around 

the world, do not pay any subscription or usage fees for traffic, weather, or aeronautical information services. 

We are continuing to develop and deploy ADS–B capabilities that will benefit the 

aviation community and, by extension, the public in oceanic, en route and terminal 

airspace. In 2015, the FAA will implement ADS–B-enabled In-Trail Procedures in 

8 

oceanic airspace that will help airlines save fuel and reduce separation distances. 

ADS–B is already being used in the en route environment in Houston and Alaska. 

The last en route site will achieve ADS–B IOC by September 2015. Ground-based 

Interval Management-Spacing capitalizes on ADS–B to streamline traffic flows into 

terminal airspace while Flight Interval Management-Spacing uses ADS–B to enable 

more precise spacing between aircraft. 

Performance Based Navigation 

Performance Based Navigation (PBN) is a blanket term for more precise GPSbased navigation methods that allow optimal routing in all phases of flight. The 

FAA has been working with stakeholders for many years on PBN implementation, 

and today there are more PBN procedures and routes than there are conventional 

ones. The agency is now employing a more systematic and collaborative approach 

to PBN deployment through our Metroplex initiative. A metroplex is a geographic 

area with several airports and high volume air traffic that interact in the same airspace. The FAA is actively working to improve how air traffic flies into, out of and 

through 13 targeted metroplexes rather than dealing with airports one at a time. 

Lessons learned from this approach are now being applied to all PBN projects across 

the National Airspace System (NAS). 

We are seeing concrete benefits through this approach. In the Denver PBN 

project, the FAA worked with aircraft operators and nine area airports to create one 

of the most comprehensive operational networks of NextGen satellite-based arrivals 

and departures in the Nation. This network enables more flexibility and better access to the airports, which the FAA estimates will save operators approximately 3.2 

million gallons of fuel. Overall, approximately 80 percent of all aircraft that fly in 

and out of Denver International are equipped to take advantage of the new procedures, which includes 51 satellite-based procedures designed to provide more direct 

routes, de-conflict the airspace, save fuel and reduce emissions. The project introduced 21 arrivals procedures with optimized profile descents, which allow aircraft 

to reduce thrust and glide down to the runway using less fuel and creating less 

noise, and two GPS approaches. Twelve additional sophisticated approach procedures, known as Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required (RNP 

AR), went into operations in late June 2013. These RNP AR procedures provide a 

more stable but curved approach, equaling a shorter flying distance. Flying these 

approaches requires specific aircraft instruments that direct the aircraft in a very 

narrow and precise corridor of airspace. The FAA has seen an approximate 35 percent decrease in the number of go-arounds caused by aircraft coming in too high 

or too fast. Aircraft on the new arrival procedures are more stabilized on their final 

approach as they usually arrive on a more predictable course and speed. That is 

only one example of success using a collaborative and systematic approach to delivering PBN benefits. 

We recently completed the Houston Metroplex project, which includes strategies 

to streamline the airspace and reduce complexity for air traffic controllers and flight 

crews. As part of the program, the FAA developed 61 new procedures and amended 

or canceled over 40 existing procedures to take advantage of the precision of GPS 

technology. These improvements will reduce flight miles, save fuel, and reduce carbon emissions. 

In addition to the Metroplex and the large-scale projects, the FAA continues to 

implement PBN at other airports across the country, including Wide Area Augmentation System Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance procedures that increase access to airports in lower visibility conditions and are especially helpful to 

general aviation pilots. 

System Wide Information Management 

System Wide Information Management (SWIM) is the digital data delivery backbone of NextGen, ensuring the right people have the right information at the right 

time. Since 2010, NAS users—particularly airline operations centers—have been accessing weather and other flight planning information via SWIM, enabling airline 

dispatchers and traffic managers to collaborate on the routing and rerouting of traffic based on real-time information. Users benefit by having access to a single, comprehensive data feed that contains management initiatives, airport runway configurations and which airports are in deicing. 

In August 2013, Miami Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) became the 

first facility to begin distributing data from the towers included in its coverage area 

to an airline via the SWIM Terminal Data Distribution System (STDDS). STDDS 

takes raw surface data and converts it into easily accessible information. The system sends surface information from airport towers to the corresponding TRACON, 

which makes the information available via SWIM messaging services. Airlines and 

9 

airports can use this information to streamline surface operations and increase efficiency. Ultimately, 136 airports will provide surface information via STDDS at 39 

TRACONs to users via SWIM services. The FAA is planning to unveil several new 

SWIM capabilities next year, including Flow Information Publication, which provides subscribers with access to traffic flow information. 

DataComm 

Another exciting capability underway is Data Communications (Data Comm). 

Data Comm allows us to communicate through written instructions to pilots, which 

reduces the possibility of error with radio communications. More importantly, Data 

Comm allows us to communicate highly complex and lengthy clearances, which are 

currently conveyed over the radio with read-backs between controllers and pilots to 

verify accuracy, by automatically uploading the information digitally into the aircraft’s flight management system. This will ultimately save operators time and 

money, and will improve the flexibility and efficiency of our operations. The FAA 

has awarded the Data Comm Integrated Services contract, which will provide for 

data communications between airport towers and appropriately equipped aircraft in 

2016. Operational Data Comm trials for departure clearances are underway in 

Memphis and Newark. 

Reporting NextGen Progress and The Future of NextGen 

We have made consistent progress in delivering NextGen in key areas, first having laid the foundation with ADS–B, ERAM, and TAMR, and we will be deploying 

new capabilities through 2020. We will continue to work closely with stakeholders 

and industry to ensure that that we are delivering the operational benefits and taking their input into account as we set NextGen priorities. We have expanded our 

public reporting of NextGen performance through success stories and performance 

snapshots on our website. The FAA publishes NextGen-specific metrics at the local 

level in order to isolate and identify NextGen improvements at site-specific locations. Core airports, key city pairs, distance/time/fuel reduction, runway safety, the 

implementation and use of NextGen technology and procedures will continue to be 

important to understanding the value and benefits of modernization. Taken together, these metrics reveal the nationwide impact of NextGen development, which 

is already showing benefits. 

Next year will be pivotal for the next stage of NextGen, as we make investment 

decisions, which are supported in our FY 2015 Budget and out-year planning documents. We look forward to working with you on NextGen planning and the upcoming Reauthorization. 

Ms. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Hampton? 

STATEMENT OF MATTHEW E. HAMPTON, 

ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR AVIATION AUDITS, 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Mr. HAMPTON. Chairwoman Cantwell, Ranking Member Ayotte, 

and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to 

testify today on the FAA’s NextGen program. 

As you know, FAA has faced considerable challenges with 

NextGen in this very complex effort. We believe FAA is now at an 

inflection point and must shift from planning to full implementation and focus on delivering benefits at specific locations. 

My testimony today will focus on FAA’s progress in three key 

areas. First, implementing NextGen related provisions of the FAA 

Reform Act. Two, responding to NextGen priorities recommended 

by the NextGen Advisory Committee, also known as the ‘‘NAC,’’ 

and three, minimizing risk with implementing critical automation 

systems. 

Without question, FAA has made progress by implementing more 

than half of the Act’s 24 NextGen provisions. For example, last 

10 

year FAA appointed a much needed Chief NextGen Officer, Mr. 

Whitaker here, to oversee the agency’s NextGen efforts and coordinating budgets and plans across the agency. 

However, FAA has yet to meet key provisions aimed specifically 

at accelerating NextGen. For example, FAA is not yet in position 

to mandate that airspace users equipped with ADS–B In, a system 

that will display more precise satellite information to pilots in the 

cockpit. ADS–B In is considered a significantly beneficial game 

changer for unlocking congested airports, but it is uncertain when 

this capability can be implemented and at what cost. 

FAA’s inability to meet these provisions and deliver NextGen capabilities are due to a number of underlying challenges. These include a lack of an executable plan, evolving requirements, and unresolved complex technical and operational issues. 

We believe some of FAA’s difficulties in implementing NextGen 

can be addressed by responding to the recommendations that the 

NAC made last September. Focusing on NextGen investment priorities is a long overdue and much needed step, and a theme of our 

work over the last two years. 

FAA is working with industry to develop milestones and implementing the prioritized capabilities, but significant challenges remain. 

For example, as we reported last week, FAA has approved the 

use of some Performance Based Navigation initiatives, known as 

‘‘PBN.’’ These procedures can provide airspace users with significant benefits, such as more streamlined flight paths and greater 

fuel efficiency. However, at the 14 large airports where FAA has 

implemented advanced procedures, those with curved and segment 

approaches to runways, only about 2 percent of the eligible flights 

actually use them. This is in part because FAA lacks an updated 

policy and procedures for controllers to handle traffic using both 

PBN and conventional means. 

FAA’s near and mid-term goals for NextGen also depend on successfully deploying new automation systems that controllers use to 

manage air traffic. Despite some progress, FAA continues to face 

technical, cost and schedule risks with two programs that are needed to modernize both the en route and terminal environment. 

For example, FAA is now using the ERAM system, the En Route 

Automation System, either full time or part time at 18 of 20 sites 

that manage high altitude traffic. FAA plans to complete this $2.5 

billion program some time in 2015. 

However, two recent major system outages at Los Angeles and 

Miami, which caused delays and cancellations of hundreds of 

flights, raised questions about the vulnerability and stability of the 

system that require urgent management attention. 

Also, we are concerned about FAA’s $500 million effort to modernize controller displays and computers that controllers use to 

manage airport arrivals and departures at 11 large airports, including seven of the most active facilities in the nation, including 

Atlanta and Dallas-Ft. Worth. 

The current cost and schedule parameters are not reliable, and 

additional funds will be needed to complete this effort. 

Going forward, FAA will need to provide a clear understanding 

of how agency priorities are linked to the budget, and develop a 

11 

1FAA’s Implementation of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 Remains Incomplete 

(OIG Testimony No. CC–2014–010), February 5, 2014. OIG reports and testimonies are available on our website at http://www.oig.dot.gov/. 

transparent execution plan for moving forward with the investment 

priorities, sustained leadership with clear lines of accountability 

and authority will be key to achieving progress. 

As the Committee begins deliberating FAA reauthorization, FAA 

will need to provide a clear understanding of how much funding is 

needed for NextGen, how much money is needed to sustain the existing NAS, and when that funding profile is needed. 

Chairwoman Cantwell, this concludes my prepared statement. I 

would be happy to answer any questions you or Ranking Member 

Ayotte or other members of the Subcommittee may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hampton follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MATTHEW E. HAMPTON, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL

FOR AVIATION AUDITS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION

Chairwoman Cantwell and Members of the Subcommittee: 

Thank you for inviting me here today to testify on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) progress and challenges in developing the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen)—a multibillion-dollar transportation infrastructure project aimed at modernizing our Nation’s aging air traffic system. Since the 

effort began almost a decade ago, we have reported on longstanding challenges and 

barriers that have limited FAA’s progress in delivering NextGen capabilities, such 

as the Agency’s inability to set realistic plans, budgets, and expectations, and clearly 

identify benefits for stakeholders. 

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the act) included 24 provisions 

intended to help FAA better manage NextGen. In addition, in September 2013, the 

NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC)—a joint Government-industry committee—delivered a report at FAA’s request with recommendations for prioritizing NextGen activities. 

My testimony today will focus on FAA’s progress in (1) implementing NextGenrelated provisions of the act, (2) responding to NextGen priorities recommended by 

the NAC, and (3) minimizing risks in implementing critical automation systems. 

In Summary 

FAA has implemented or is on target to implement more than half of the act’s 

24 NextGen-related provisions, including appointing a Chief NextGen Officer. However, FAA has yet to meet provisions intended to accelerate the development of critical NextGen technologies, including a key element of the Automatic Dependent 

Surveillance Broadcast (ADS–B) program—a cornerstone technology for FAA’s goals 

to transform air traffic management. FAA’s inability to meet these provisions and 

deliver NextGen capabilities is due to underlying programmatic challenges, such as 

the lack of an executable plan for coordinating among multiple programs, unresolved complex technical and operational issues, and ineffective collaboration with 

industry. FAA is also in the early stages of responding to the NAC’s recommended 

investment priorities for advancing NextGen, including establishing performancebased navigation (PBN). Consistent with our work, the NAC confirmed the importance of PBN, which can provide significant near-term benefits to airspace users. 

However, obstacles such as a lack of updated controller policies and procedures 

make it uncertain when users can expect these benefits. Finally, FAA continues to 

face technical, cost, and schedule risks with its efforts to modernize or replace air 

traffic control automation systems that are fundamental to achieving NextGen benefits. 

More Than Half of the Act’s NextGen Modernization Provisions Have Been 

Implemented 

As we testified in February 2014,1 FAA has made progress implementing the act’s 

NextGen provisions. As of June 2014, FAA has implemented or is on target to implement 16 of 24 NextGen-related provisions—including 3 provisions intended to adVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
12 

2 Recognizing the need to better position the Agency to execute NextGen, FAA announced a 

major reorganization in 2011. Specifically, FAA appointed an Assistant Administrator for 

NextGen, who reports directly to the FAA Deputy Administrator, and established a new Program Management Office. 3 ADS–B In technology provides pilots with information transmitted from ADS–B ground stations as well as other aircraft. If an operator chooses to equip an aircraft with ADS–B In avionics, a compatible display is needed to view the information. 4 ‘‘A Report from the ADS–B In Aviation Rulemaking Committee to the FAA,’’ September 30, 

2011. 5 Air-to-air as it relates to ADS–B refers to communication of flight information between two 

or more ADS–B In-equipped aircraft to improve situational awareness while in flight. 6 Addressing Underlying Causes for NextGen Delays Will Require Sustained FAA Leadership 

and Action (OIG Report No. AV–2014–031), February 25, 2014. 

vance new air traffic procedures and technologies and increase accountability. Specifically: 

• In May 2012, FAA established a program that uses third parties to develop and 

test advanced navigation procedures at five mid-sized airports. 

• In October 2012, the Agency completed a multi-agency NextGen Integrated 

Work Plan that defines the responsibilities of partner agencies—such as the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration— 

for conducting NextGen-related research. 

• In June 2013, FAA appointed its Deputy Administrator as the Chief NextGen 

Officer. The Deputy Administrator will oversee FAA’s NextGen modernization 

efforts, including coordinating NextGen budgetary and planning activities 

across the Agency’s lines of business and with partner agencies.2

Despite this progress, FAA and the Department have not implemented key provisions that are intended to accelerate the development of NextGen technologies and 

achieve the full range of NextGen benefits. Most notably, FAA has not carried out 

important provisions related to accelerating ADS–B—the foundation for shifting 

from today’s ground-based radar to NextGen’s satellite-based systems. Although 

FAA has mandated that all airspace users purchase and install ADS–B Out—onboard avionics for broadcasting flight information to controllers and FAA ground 

systems—it has not issued a mandate for ADS–B In,3 which enables the display of 

the broadcast information in the cockpit. Moreover, the Department has not established a public-private incentive program to encourage users to install NextGen avionics equipment on aircraft. 

The Act directed FAA to begin a rulemaking process for ADS–B In, with the goal 

of mandating the new technology by 2020 for aircraft operating in capacity-constrained airspace. However, technical requirements for ADS–B In continue to evolve, 

raising questions about whether the technology will be available by 2020. A report 4

by the ADS–B In Aviation Rulemaking Committee cautioned that the air-to-air 5 applications for ADS–B In were not mature and that the costs and benefits were uncertain. The report also stated that FAA lacks well-defined policy, equipment standards, certification and operational approval guidance, procedures, and ground automation—all prerequisites for a successful rulemaking effort. As a result, it is uncertain when FAA will be in position to mandate ADS–B In and enhance airport capacity. 

While FAA explores options for NextGen rulemaking initiatives, the Agency has 

taken some near-term actions to advance ADS–B. FAA is providing funding for airlines to purchase ADS–B equipment, and has entered into partnerships with several 

U.S. airlines to develop and demonstrate ADS–B In applications and procedures. 

For example, U.S. Airways plans to install ADS–B systems in 20 Airbus A330 aircraft to assess the use of cockpit displays in maintaining proper spacing between 

aircraft on arrivals. FAA expects some elements of the demonstrations to be completed in 2017. 

As we reported in February 2014,6 FAA’s failure to meet congressional and industry expectations for NextGen is largely due to a number of barriers, such as the lack 

of an executable plan for coordinating among multiple programs, unresolved complex technical and operational issues, and ineffective collaboration with industry. 

FAA’s NextGen plans—which initially estimated completion by 2025 at a cost of $40 

billion—lack sound strategies for implementing a system that could handle three 

times more traffic while reducing FAA’s operating costs. Moreover, FAA’s organizational culture—which is highly operational, tactical, and safety-oriented—has been 

slow to embrace NextGen’s transformational vision. Gaps in leadership have further 

undermined the Agency’s efforts to advance NextGen. These weaknesses have conVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
13 

7The Success of FAA’s Long-Term Plan for Air Traffic Facility Realignments and Consolidations Depends on Addressing Key Technical, Financial, and Workforce Challenges (OIG Report 

No. AV–2012–151), July 17, 2012. 8 En route centers guide airplanes flying at high altitudes through large sections of airspace. 

9PBN is a blanket term for more precise GPS-based navigation methods that allow optimal 

routing in all phases of flight. 10The NAC is a Federal advisory committee that develops recommendations for NextGen portfolios with an emphasis on the midterm (through 2018). The NAC includes representation from 

affected user groups, including operators, manufacturers, air traffic management, aviation safety, airports, and environmental experts. 11 RNAV is a method of navigation in which aircraft use avionics, such as Global Positioning 

Systems, to fly any desired flight path without the limitations imposed by ground-based navigation systems. RNP is a form of RNAV that adds on-board monitoring and alerting capabilities 

for pilots, thereby allowing aircraft to fly more precise flight paths. 12 In 2009, an FAA-commissioned RTCA task force made 32 recommendations to advance 

NextGen and stated that focusing on delivering near-term operational benefits, rather than 

major infrastructure programs, would help gain industry confidence in FAA’s plans and encourage users to invest in NextGen. RTCA, Inc. is a private, not-for-profit corporation that functions 

as a Federal advisory committee. 

tributed to stakeholders’ skepticism about NextGen’s feasibility and airspace users’ 

reluctance to invest in costly equipment. 

The extent to which FAA realigns and consolidates the Nation’s air traffic control 

facilities will be another important component of the Agency’s NextGen efforts. In 

compliance with the act, in December 2013, FAA provided Congress with a plan for 

consolidating and realigning its air traffic facilities. The plan, developed collaboratively with the National Air Traffic Controller Association and Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, institutes a new process for evaluating and recommending 

realignments of its terminal facilities. However, the plan is less comprehensive than 

the Agency’s previous plans that we reviewed in 2012,7 as it does not include a process for realigning and consolidating facilities that manage high-altitude traffic.8 Regardless, as we recommended in 2012, it will be important for the Agency going forward to establish sound metrics to determine whether facility realignments and consolidations will result in measurable cost savings, operational efficiencies, and productivity enhancements. 

FAA Is Working With Industry To Implement High-Priority NAC 

Recommendations But Challenges Remain 

The success of FAA’s efforts to implement NextGen depends on the Agency’s ability to set priorities, deliver benefits, and maintain stakeholder support. To address 

some of these challenges, FAA is working with industry to implement the prioritized 

NextGen capabilities recommended by the NAC, which include performance-based 

navigation (PBN) 9 due to its great potential for providing near-term benefits to airspace users. Although FAA has important PBN efforts under way, the Agency faces 

obstacles that make it uncertain when airspace users can expect widespread benefits. 

FAA Is Working With Industry To Develop a Plan With Milestones for Implementing 

Prioritized NextGen Capabilities 

In July 2013, FAA requested that the NAC 10 review the Agency’s NextGen implementation plans and recommend investment priorities, citing uncertainty around 

funding for NextGen projects. The NAC delivered its report in September 2013 and 

identified industry’s top NextGen priorities based on planned benefits and implementation readiness. 

Consistent with our work, the NAC ranked PBN as the top activity that FAA 

should continue regardless of its budget situation. Introducing new PBN procedures, 

such as Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP),11 is 

critical to achieving near-term NextGen benefits, including more direct flight paths, 

improved on-time aircraft arrival rates, greater fuel savings, and reduced aircraft 

noise. Other activities that top the NAC’s list include unlocking closely spaced parallel runway operations, enhancing airport surface operations through data sharing, 

and developing capabilities for merging and spacing aircraft to increase PBN use. 

These priorities are in line with prior NAC recommendations and a Governmentindustry task force.12

FAA is working jointly with industry to develop milestones for implementing the 

prioritized capabilities, which require operators to make changes to their aircraft 

and flight operations centers, as well as provide additional pilot training. Specifically, FAA and the NAC have established ‘‘integrated’’ work groups to identify specific locations for delivery, timelines for implementation, metrics for measuring benefits, and cost estimates for each of the capabilities. The work groups have been 

14 

13OIG Audit Announcement, ‘‘Review of FAA’s Response to the NextGen Advisory Committee’s (NAC) Recommendations on NextGen Priorities,’’ February 27, 2014. 14FAA tasked MITRE to obtain and analyze data to measure the use of PBN procedures and 

quantify their benefits. MITRE Corporation manages a research and development center for 

FAA, the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development. 15The 14 large airports are Baltimore-Washington International, Chicago Midway, Denver 

International, Fort Lauderdale International, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, JFK 

International and LaGuardia in New York, Memphis, Minneapolis/St. Paul International, Newark Liberty, San Francisco, Seattle-Tacoma, and Dulles and Reagan National in Washington, 

D.C. 16 Curved approaches to runways improve the use of airspace by allowing aircraft to avoid critical areas of terrain or conflicting airspace, thus increasing capacity. 17 An eligible flight is one in which (1) the aircraft was authorized to fly the RNP procedure 

and (2) the flight was in a position to join the procedure. 18 NextGen Advisory Committee in Response to Tasking from the Federal Aviation Administration, ‘‘Recommendation for Increased Utilization of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) in 

the National Airspace System (NAS),’’ June 2013. 19The 13 metroplex locations are: Atlanta, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, Houston, Memphis, 

Northern California, North Texas, Phoenix, Southern California, Washington, D.C., Cleveland/ 

Detroit, and South/Central Florida. 20 Challenges With Implementing Near-Term NextGen Capabilities at Congested Airports Could 

Delay Benefits (OIG Report No. AV–2012–167), August 1, 2012. 

meeting since April 2014 and are working toward an interim report in July 2014, 

followed by a master implementation plan in October 2014 that will include commitments from both FAA and industry for the next 1 to 3 years. 

However, reaching these commitments may prove difficult as airspace users focus 

on ‘‘capabilities,’’ while FAA focuses on programs and infrastructure. Airspace users 

also want near-term operational benefits but FAA’s delays in defining NextGen benefits have deepened industry’s reluctance to invest. Moreover, FAA has not always 

provided a clear understanding of how it will manage and execute implementation 

and what it will take to deliver these efforts—particularly in managing complex 

interdependencies among programs, such as PBN and controller automation systems, to minimize risk. 

According to FAA officials, the Agency does not plan to adjust its budgets since 

the current capital funding level will accommodate these investment priorities without trade-offs at this time. We will continue to monitor FAA’s efforts with setting 

NextGen priorities in our ongoing review of the Agency’s progress in responding to 

the NAC’s recommendations.13

FAA Faces Obstacles in Implementing New PBN Flight Procedures To Optimize 

Near-Term Benefits 

As it works to develop milestones for implementing the NAC’s priority capabilities, particularly PBN, FAA will need to continue its efforts to implement recommendations we made to address barriers identified by our office, FAA, and the 

NAC. Although FAA has introduced more than 100 RNP procedures at large airports, preliminary data 14 indicate that RNP use is low, particularly at busy airports, such as those in the New York City area. Notably, at the 14 large airports 15

where FAA has implemented advanced PBN procedures with curved approaches to 

runways,16 only about 2 percent of eligible airline flights 17 actually used them. 

Several obstacles have undermined FAA’s efforts to increase use of PBN procedures. For example, according to a March 2012 FAA internal study and a June 2013 

NAC report,18 controllers at busy metroplex locations lack automated tools to manage mixed operations—that is, merging aircraft using straight-in approaches with 

those on curved paths. Other reported obstacles include the lack of clearly defined 

operational goals for designing PBN procedures, outdated controller procedures, and 

the lack of standard training for pilots and controllers. In 2012, FAA tasked a team 

with developing an action plan to address these obstacles, but it remains unclear 

as to when they will issue a report on the team’s plan. 

Further, it is uncertain when airspace users can expect widespread benefits. In 

2010, FAA launched its metroplex initiative—a 7-year effort to improve the flow of 

traffic and efficiency at congested airports in 13 major metropolitan areas.19 While 

FAA is in the study or design and implementation phase at 9 of 13 metroplex locations, it has only recently implemented new PBN procedures for one location—Houston, TX. According to FAA, airline procedure design and other issues have caused 

delays at other metroplex sites ranging from 2 months to over 1 year. 

According to FAA, the launch of new procedures at Houston in May 2014 was a 

success; however, the Agency will not know the extent of benefits realized until it 

completes its 6-month post-implementation assessment. As we reported in August 

2012,20 industry representatives expressed concerns that FAA’s metroplex initiative 

15 

21FAA Faces Significant Obstacles in Advancing the Implementation and Use of PerformanceBased Navigation Procedures (OIG Report No. AV–2014–057), June 17, 2014. 22 NAV Lean was a cross-agency project to streamline policies and processes used to implement instrument flight procedures in response to a 2009 joint FAA-industry task force report 

recommendation. FAA used the ‘‘Lean Management Process’’ to identify areas of waste. 23Decommissioning involves the disconnection, removal, and disposal of the HOST legacy computer system once ERAM has been declared operationally ready at a site. 24This includes both capital and operations funding but does not include NextGen efforts, 

which are also funded against the same contract. 

will not maximize benefits because the Agency has not integrated efforts from other 

related initiatives, such as better managing airport taxiway, gate, and parking area 

operations. They also stated concerns that FAA has not provided enough advanced 

PBN procedures—specifically, those that regularly allow for more precise and 

curved approaches. 

As we reported last week,21 efforts to introduce more advanced routes have been 

impeded by the lengthy development and approval process for new PBN procedures. 

In September 2010, FAA reported numerous problems with the process, such as the 

lack of an expedited method for approving procedures that require only minor revisions, inaccurate interpretations of environmental policies and guidance, and data 

inconsistencies. To address these problems, FAA made 21 recommendations for 

streamlining the process for deploying new procedures in an internal review—the 

NAV Lean project.22 In June 2011, FAA issued its plan for executing the 21 recommendations and to date has implemented 9. However, FAA does not expect to 

complete the entire NAV Lean initiative until September 2015. Ultimately, industry 

will not get the full benefits of NAV Lean—to decrease the time it takes to implement new procedures by more than 40 percent—until all recommendations are implemented. 

We made three recommendations to help mitigate barriers to PBN implementation and expedite the development of new procedures, including completing an action plan, establishing firm requirements and schedules, and measuring benefits 

regularly. 

Significant Risks Remain In Implementing Critical NextGen Automation 

Systems 

FAA’s goals for NextGen in the near-and mid-term also depend on the success of 

its ongoing efforts to deploy new automation systems that controllers use to manage 

air traffic. However, despite recent progress, FAA continues to face technical, cost, 

and schedule risks with both its En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) program—an over $2.5 billion system for processing en route flight data—and the Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement (TAMR) program—FAA’s effort to 

modernize terminal air traffic control facilities. 

FAA Made Progress With ERAM But Recent Outages Have Exposed Vulnerabilities 

FAA’s long-term NextGen goals, such as increasing airspace capacity and reducing 

flight delays, depend on fully implementing the ERAM program. ERAM, which processes flight data to allow controllers to manage traffic at en route air traffic facilities, is a key foundation for realizing the benefits of NextGen’s transformational programs, such as new satellite-based surveillance systems and data communications 

for controllers and pilots. 

Following extensive software-related problems that resulted in significant delays 

and cost increases, FAA has made progress with ERAM over the last 2 years. The 

Agency is now using ERAM at 18 of FAA’s 20 en route air traffic facilities either 

on a full- or part-time basis—a significant step forward given the extensive problems at the 2 initial sites. FAA plans for all 20 sites to achieve full operational capability and to decommission 23 the legacy system by 2015. 

However, as FAA continues to deploy ERAM to the Nation’s busiest facilities, 

such as those in New York City and Washington, D.C., it expects to identify new 

problems that could further impact cost and schedule. FAA is currently spending 

about $10.4 million a month on the ERAM contract.24 Also, FAA has already approved an additional $160 million for ERAM enhancements through 2016 to help 

address site-specific issues. 

In addition, controllers and experts continue to raise concerns about ERAM’s capabilities. While these issues are not expected to delay ERAM’s expected 2015 completion date, they will need to be addressed for the system to support most NextGen 

initiatives. Two capabilities raise most stakeholder concerns: 

• Flight Plan Trajectory Modeler—This capability models aircraft flight paths to 

predict aircraft conflicts and to ensure accurate handoffs between controllers as 

16 

25Trajectory-based operations focus on more precisely managing aircraft from departure to arrival with the benefits of reduced fuel consumption, lower operating costs, and reduced emissions. 26FAA’s Acquisition Strategy for Terminal Modernization is at Risk for Cost Increases, Schedule Delays, and Performance Shortfalls (OIG Report Number: AV–2013–097), May 29, 2013. 27 Common Automated Radar Terminal System (CARTS–IIIE) is the existing automation system currently at the 11 large terminal facilities. 28 Initial Operating Capability (IOC) is the milestone in which controllers begin to use the system on a limited basis to manage traffic. 

they communicate with pilots who transition to airspace controlled by another 

facility. However, the modeler software has often required adjustments to 

change the flight plan trajectory to ensure accurate handoffs. According to controllers, improvements are needed to support current operations and NextGen 

capabilities that use trajectory-based operations.25

• Aircraft Tracking and Sensor Fusion—This capability allows ERAM to integrate—or ‘‘fuse’’—multiple radars and satellite-based information for controllers. 

However, thus far, controllers have not been able to take advantage of this improved capability because of problems accurately integrating radar and satellite 

data. A MITRE analysis found that the ERAM tracker will require adjustments 

to use ADS–B and radar together to manage air traffic. 

Moreover, two recent major system outages at two sites exposed new vulnerabilities in the ERAM system. The more severe outage occurred on April 30, 2014, at 

the Los Angeles Center and resulted in a significant disruption in air traffic control 

operations that impacted thousands of travelers. According to FAA, the outage was 

triggered by a flight plan for an Air Force aircraft flying at an extremely high-altitude—60,000 feet—far above normal airline travel. This situation triggered an 

ERAM software glitch that caused the system to attempt to alter other aircraft 

flight plans, which overloaded the system for about 2 hours. Though less severe, 

ERAM also experienced an outage at the Miami center in February 2014 that 

caused delays or cancellations of hundreds of flights. 

FAA is working to address the root causes of these outages, has made emergency 

modifications to the ERAM software, and plans to include a more permanent fix in 

the next software release due later this year. Nevertheless, these outages raise 

questions about the long-term stability and security of the system, as well as its 

ability to support NextGen capabilities. It remains uncertain when ERAM will be 

stable enough to remove the back-up legacy system as FAA intends. 

FAA Faces Significant Cost, Schedule, and Technical Risks in Modernizing or 

Replacing Automation Systems at Terminal Facilities 

FAA’s TAMR program aims to modernize or replace all of the automation systems 

that controllers rely on to manage traffic at terminal facilities with a single automation platform—the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS). If 

effectively implemented, TAMR is expected to reduce Agency costs and facilitate the 

implementation of NextGen capabilities. TAMR’s current effort involves modernizing 

automation systems at 11 terminal facilities, 7 of which are the largest and busiest 

in the Nation. FAA estimates this effort will cost $438 million and will be completed 

between 2015 and 2017. 

However, as we reported in May 2013,26 the Agency faces significant cost, schedule, and technical risks to modernize these facilities. Specifically, FAA has yet to 

identify and finalize all software and hardware requirements that are needed to successfully replace the existing automation system 27 with STARS. Finalizing these requirements involves extensive software development and testing—a lengthy and potentially costly process should issues arise during testing. FAA is currently developing software to address 94 requirements gaps but anticipates identifying more 

gaps once it begins transitioning to STARS at the busiest facilities. Moreover, because full STARS capability at the 11 terminal facilities is still years away, FAA 

continues to add new capabilities to existing systems at select facilities to support 

air traffic operations. The longer FAA maintains and updates existing systems at 

these sites, the greater the implementation and cost risk because FAA will have to 

add the same capabilities to STARS. 

Furthermore, FAA’s current cost and schedule estimates for its TAMR effort are 

not reliable. For example, FAA’s approved program schedule does not include detailed milestones for software testing and implementation, and was not assessed for 

risk per Agency requirements. In addition, FAA’s experience deploying STARS at 

the first site at Dallas Fort Worth Terminal Radar Approach Control (DFW 

TRACON) facility is proving more difficult than expected. According to FAA, DFW 

TRACON achieved initial operating capability (IOC),28 however, software requireVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
17 

ments remain unstable. FAA has identified 46 additional requirements that will be 

needed to ensure STARS provides at least the same capabilities as the existing system at the site. FAA also determined that meeting the unique needs of the other 

10 sites requires more enhancements or modifications than originally planned. As 

a result, the true timelines and costs to modernize terminal automation systems remain unknown, and FAA will likely have to secure additional funds for the program. 

We made a number of recommendations to better and more cost-efficiently manage FAA’s terminal modernization efforts. FAA generally agreed with our recommendations and has begun working to address them. 

Conclusion 

NextGen is a complex undertaking that will continue to pose challenges to FAA 

for years to come—challenges that have been exacerbated by unrealistic plans, 

budgets, and expectations for key NextGen programs. Going forward, FAA will need 

to provide a clear understanding of Agency priorities to decisionmakers and stakeholders and how the priorities are linked to its budgets. Most importantly, FAA 

must develop a reasonable and transparent action plan with firm commitments on 

milestones and metrics for measuring benefits—essential for building stakeholder 

confidence. Sustained leadership with clear lines of accountability and authority will 

be key to accelerating NextGen progress. We remain committed to monitoring FAA’s 

NextGen efforts and identifying opportunities to improve implementation. 

Chairwoman Cantwell, this concludes my prepared statement. I am happy to answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Hampton. We certainly appreciate your report. It is very helpful, so we will have questions 

for you. 

Mr. Rinaldi? 

STATEMENT OF PAUL RINALDI, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL AIR 

TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION 

Mr. RINALDI. Thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell, Senator Ayotte, 

members of the Committee for the opportunity to testify before you 

today. 

My name is Paul Rinaldi. I am the President of the National Air 

Traffic Controllers Association, NATCA. NATCA represents 20,000 

air traffic controllers, engineers, aircraft certification specialists, 

and other aviation safety professionals. 

As the working men and women who make up our nation’s air 

traffic control system, our members are dedicated to furthering the 

public’s interest and preserving and promoting and continuing to 

run the world’s safest, most efficient airspace system. 

Our dedication is evident in our long history of supporting new 

technology, modernization, and enhancing our nation’s complex and 

diverse aviation system. 

NATCA is a strong supporter of NextGen modernization projects 

currently underway, and we believe that these programs provide 

much needed improvements in enhanced efficiency and increase in 

safety of the national airspace system. 

NATCA is proud to be an active, involved stakeholder and applauds this committee for including stakeholder involvement provisions in the 2012 FAA reauthorization bill. The success of collaboration with the FAA and other aviation stakeholders on the 

NextGen Advisory Committee and RTCA has greatly improved the 

efficiency of the NextGen modernization process to the point that 

we are now seeing tangible results. 

So, the good news is there is progress out there, and it is benefiting the users of the national airspace system. Some of the highVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
18 

lights—optimization of airspace and procedures in the Metroplex, 

we call ‘‘OAPM.’’ 

The FAA has recently implemented 61 new procedures through 

the OAPM process in Houston. These procedures will affect all aircraft around the Houston Metroplex and allow aircraft to be flown 

more efficiently with fewer altitude holds and speed restrictions. 

This will save millions of dollars in fuel each year, reducing the 

carbon footprint and eliminating noise on the environment. These 

procedures are comparative to you being on the highway setting 

your car at 55 miles an hour and never hitting the brakes until you 

get to your destination. 

This was a monumental task with a complete collaborative effort 

between the airlines, the pilots, the controllers, and FAA. 

Another area we are seeing success is re-categorization of wake 

turbulence separation standards, we call ‘‘RECAT.’’ Experts in 

wake turbulence, safety, and risk analysis have determined the decrease of separation between similar type aircraft is as safe or safer 

than current standards. RECAT has the capacity of enhancing safety, reducing delays, saving fuel, and reducing aviation’s environmental impact. 

Memphis was the first facility to apply these new standards on 

November 1, 2012. Federal Express Airlines has been pleased with 

the results. Departure delays were reduced by 74 percent within 

the first week of implementation. Controllers have been very supportive of this technology and the tools that help them identify the 

weight categories of each airplane. 

We have rolled RECAT out to three other airports and we are 

seeing similar type benefits, and we look to expeditiously roll it out 

across the country. 

These are just a few examples of the benefits of NextGen, but I 

must say the aviation community and the FAA all see valuable 

benefits of modernization, and we believe if they continue the current practice of stakeholder collaboration, especially with the front 

line workforce, we will continue to see timely progress on many of 

these NextGen projects and improve the safety and efficiency of the 

national airspace system. 

The bad news is we are very concerned about the inconsistency 

and the unstable funding. In the past year alone, the government 

shutdown and mandatory sequester cuts have resulted in furloughs 

at the FAA and slowed and halted several essential NextGen 

projects, including ERAM and TAMR. 

ERAM and TAMR are the backbone of NextGen modernization. 

They are our platforms, and without updating our platforms, nothing else will work. When they are delayed, it is a domino effect, 

and all other programs will be delayed. 

Funding uncertainty has created a stop and go pace at the FAA. 

When you don’t know what you are going to have three months 

from now, six months from now, or even trying to plan year to 

year, this causes delays and adds cost overruns to many projects. 

Along with stable funding, we would also like to see streamlining 

of the rulemaking process at the FAA. This is needed to be a priority, to take advantage of new procedures and equipment of 

NextGen. The long, laborious process currently in place wastes valuable time. 

19 

NATCA believes these changes of stable funding and streamlining the rulemaking process along with continued stakeholder involvement are needed in order to successfully implement NextGen 

across this country. 

Madam Chairwoman, I thank you for the opportunity to testify 

in front of you today. I look forward to answering any questions 

you or the Committee may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rinaldi follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PAUL RINALDI, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC

CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) is the exclusive representative of close to 20,000 aviation safety professionals, including more than 

14,000 air traffic controllers serving the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the 

Department of Defense (DOD) and the private sector. In addition, NATCA represents FAA’s Alaska flight service specialists, FAA engineers, traffic management 

coordinators, aircraft certification professionals, agency operational support staff, regional personnel from FAA’s logistics, budget, finance, acquisitions, and information 

technology divisions, as well as agency occupational health specialists, and medical 

program specialists. 

Air traffic controllers are dedicated to ensuring that our National Airspace System 

(NAS) is the safest and most efficient in the world. In order to maintain that safety 

and efficiency, our controllers work to improve safety procedures, modernize the 

NAS, and promote new technology. We have professional controllers involved in 

nearly every modernization and Next Generation Air Transportation System 

(NextGen)-related program the FAA is currently working on. Controller skills are 

put to work every day as they handle an impressive volume of flights—air traffic 

controllers separate more than 70,000 flights each day, safely moving nearly two 

million passengers through our skies daily. Air traffic controllers handle these 

flights in the busiest and most complex airspace in the world with roughly 5,000 

planes in the sky at any given moment. 

Executive Summary 

NATCA is a strong supporter of the NextGen modernization projects currently underway. We believe these programs are much-needed improvements that will increase the safety and efficiency of the NAS. NATCA is proud to be an actively involved stakeholder, and applauds this Committee for its work in including a stakeholder involvement provision in the 2012 FAA Reauthorization Act. The success of 

our collaboration with the FAA and other aviation stakeholders has greatly improved the efficiency of the NextGen modernization process. 

At the same time, NATCA is concerned about the lack of stable funding for these 

important NextGen modernization projects. In the past year, mandatory sequestration cuts have resulted in furloughs at the FAA that slowed and halted several essential NextGen projects, including En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM), 

Data Communications (DataComm), and Terminal Automation Modernization and 

Replacement (TAMR). ERAM is the backbone of NextGen modernizations. When 

ERAM is delayed, other projects are also delayed in a domino effect. Funding uncertainty has also created a stop-and-go pace that adds cost overruns as air traffic controllers must be retrained each time a project is halted—lost time becomes lost 

money, and lost opportunity to reap the benefits of these modernizations. 

Today we would like to highlight the immediate effects that unstable funding has 

had on NextGen. Specific projects such as ERAM, TAMR, DataComm, and Performance Based Navigation (PBN) have all faced setbacks in the last year due to the 

April 2013 furloughs and the October 2013 government shutdown. These projects 

rely on stable funding in order to plan for test dates, training, and implementation 

of new procedures. Without stability, they lose time and money. 

This testimony will also provide an overview of several NextGen projects that are 

already showing beneficial results. NATCA believes that with the benefit of stable 

funding we will continue to reap the benefits of NextGen modernization projects, 

such as: the Optimization of Airspace & Procedures in the Metroplex (OAPM); Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B); Wide Area Multilateration 

(WAM); PBN; Re-Categorization of Separation Standards (RECAT); DataComm; and 

the Equivalent Lateral Spacing Operations (ELSO). 

The successes of these projects demonstrate the benefits of NextGen and why 

Congress should prioritize stable funding that allows for the projects to be comVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
20 

pleted. For example, Houston has successfully implemented a total of 61 new procedures through OAPM (this includes 50 new procedures and 11 modified or amended 

procedures). These procedures will affect the airspace around Houston and allow 

aircraft to be flown more efficiently with fewer altitude holds and speed restrictions. 

The airlines’ fuel savings from the implementation of Houston’s OAPM are projected 

to be $9.2–$26 million each year. 

ADS–B in the Gulf of Mexico is already improving safety and efficiency. Controllers and pilots have benefitted tremendously from ADS–B. Aircraft flying westbound 

from Florida have been able to reduce delays because they can now remain in radar 

control when deviating south of course due to weather. In addition, helicopters flying to the oil platforms in the Gulf are delayed less frequently during poor weather 

because controllers are able to see them on radar now instead of working a manual 

non-radar grid system. 

Newark Airport has been conducting a trial of issuing clearances via DataComm. 

We anticipate benefits such as more efficient communication between pilots and controllers, fewer mistakes, and faster communication time, which saves valuable time 

when an aircraft is being rerouted. 

Again, NATCA believes that NextGen will increase the safety and efficiency of the 

NAS, and hopes that Congress adequately funds the programs so all aviation stakeholders reap the benefits of modernization. 

Next Generation Air Traffic Control System 

NextGen is the FAA’s effort to modernize the Nation’s air traffic control system. 

NATCA fully supports NextGen modernization, which will allow the FAA to meet 

increased demand while improving the safety and efficiency of the NAS, reducing 

delays, and protecting the environment. According to the FAA’s vision, NextGen will 

enable more aircraft to safely fly closer together on more direct routes, reducing 

delays, carbon emissions, fuel consumption, and noise. 

NextGen projects are transforming the national air transportation system by 

using new and existing technologies including satellite navigation and control of aircraft, advanced digital communications, and enhanced connectivity between all components of the NAS. 

NATCA is proud to be involved in all aspects of the process as an essential stakeholder. NATCA and the FAA both recognize that stakeholder involvement is the key 

to continued success to NextGen. We applaud the Committee for their efforts to ensure this collaboration through the stakeholder involvement provision in the 2012 

FAA Reauthorization Act. In addition to being present on NextGen projects, NATCA 

is represented as a member of the RTCA, the FAA Management Advisory Council 

(MAC), and the NextGen Advisory Committee. Our presence, as well as that of 

other industry leaders, has been an important addition to the discussion on modernization. 

Full Funding Is Essential for NextGen 

NATCA supports NextGen modernization projects and believes controllers and 

end users, including the traveling public and airlines, are already seeing benefits 

from these projects. Recent improvements in collaboration among all aviation stakeholders have resulted in smoother planning, development, testing, and implementation of many projects. 

However, while collaboration has greatly improved, it cannot overcome the negative consequences of unstable funding. We continue to see cost overruns and delays, 

which are certainly compounded when Congress is unable to provide stable, predictable funding. The April 2013 furloughs, created by sequestration-mandated across 

the board budget cuts, created significant delays not just to aircraft, but also to important NextGen projects. The October 2013 government shutdown further compounded those delays. In order to continue benefiting from these modernization 

projects and seeing the results, Congress must provide stable and predictable funding to the FAA. 

In addition to unstable funding, NextGen is also hindered by an aging physical 

infrastructure. The FAA has had difficulty keeping up with repairs for the physical 

air traffic control towers, and lagging maintenance creates difficulties to teams 

working to develop and deploy NextGen technology. 

Between the week-long furlough of employees at the FAA in April 2013 and the 

Federal Government shutdown in October 2013, the FAA lost time and money on 

several of its key projects. In both cases the FAA was required to suspend activities 

on many key programs, sending controllers working on these projects back to their 

facilities to work traffic or in some cases furloughing them. Timetables had to be 

pushed back, which increased costs and delayed other project timelines. 

21 

Specific Delays Due to Funding Lapses in 2013 

• En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM): ERAM, which is the backbone of 

NextGen modernization, will replace the 40-year-old En Route Host computer 

and backup system used at 20 FAA Air Route Traffic Control Centers nationwide. The FAA has been spending a significant amount of money to maintain 

and update two systems simultaneously in order to continue running the NAS 

at full capacity. ERAM was initially scheduled to fully replace the old system 

in August 2014. As a result of the April 2013 furloughs, that completion date 

has been pushed to March 2015, a delay that will cost in excess of $42 million. 

With the funding uncertainty of the last 12 months, the FAA has attempted to 

reduce delays to ERAM for as long as possible by stretching budgets in an effort 

to avoid cancelling testing and training. They also sought to save money by cancelling controller training trips to the FAA Technical Center (Tech Center). By 

October 2013, the FAA had to cancel several tests at key centers because previous delays made them impossible to go forward. For example, if Fort Worth 

Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC or Center), Boston Center, and Memphis Center were unable to complete their tests in October, the training that 

had been completed by their controllers would go stale, meaning that all participants would need to be retrained. The retraining takes time and adds significant additional cost. For example, New York and Washington Centers had 

begun training their workforce for ERAM Operations prior to the shutdown. 

They were scheduled to begin ERAM operations in December 2013. The delay 

in their training has affected the entire program by adding up to four additional 

months to the current completion date of March 2015. The delays in implementation cost $6 million per month. 

• Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR): This program is 

modernizing the air traffic control systems at the Nation’s major airports as 

well as every Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) in the country. 

TAMR is scheduled to replace some radar systems that are nearly 50 years old. 

Nearly all of the Nation’s 253 terminal facilities will be affected by TAMR. 

TAMR’s mission is to combine and upgrade multiple air traffic control technologies to a single, state-of-the-art platform called the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS), which will maintain the safety and increase the efficiency of the NAS. 

Sequestration cuts and the 2013 government shutdown caused a ripple effect 

for TAMR testing and deployment. Several projects were delayed by months, 

and installations were postponed as a result. The TAMR project team worked 

with a skeleton group during the October 2013 shutdown. Due to economic uncertainty, the FAA sent its subject matter experts back to controlling traffic, 

which halted installations and tests, training development, and training. All of 

these aspects were expensive to shut down, reschedule, and finally restart. Essentially, the cost and ramifications of the shutdown are just now being fully 

realized. The consequences of installation and procurement delays, along with 

the rescheduling of nearly every program activity is far-reaching, and the cost 

has been estimated at as much as $10 million per month. However, since the 

shutdown ended the program has worked feverishly to recover lost time through 

collaboration. 

TAMR is now in full deployment and technical refresh mode in all three phases, 

having recently installed STARS at Dallas, Boise, Kalamazoo, and Allentown, 

and conducted technical refresh upgrades at Philadelphia and Miami. NATCA 

subject matter experts (SMEs) are working in all areas of this program and 

finding solutions to problems that have plagued modernization efforts in the 

past. Installation of equipment as well as modernization efforts are underway 

at literally dozens of TRACON facilities across the country including: Northern 

California, Southern California, New York, Atlanta, Denver, Chicago, Louisville, 

St. Louis, Minneapolis, Potomac, Austin, Billings, Tampa, Seattle, Salt Lake, 

Orlando, and more. NATCA SMEs have contributed to the success of this program and an incredible number of acquisition program baseline goals are being 

reached on or ahead of schedule as a result. 

The reasons for TAMR’s recent successes are many, but can only be accomplished with a steady funding commitment. The program and FAA are poised 

for monumental success like never before provided that the adequate resources 

continue to be made available. Staying the course and finishing this project is 

vital to facilitate many NextGen programs. 

• Optimization of Airspace & Procedures in the Metroplex (OAPM): Also known 

as Metroplex, OAPM works to increase the efficiency of airspace by improving 

22 

procedures. These changes will provide economic benefits for airlines, as well 

as fuel savings that are beneficial for the environment. We know from initial 

testing at the Washington, D.C. location, for example, that annual fuel savings 

are exceeding estimates and could be as much as $19 million each year, and 

a reduction of 75,000 metric tons of carbon. Thus the real cost is the lost opportunity for efficiency and sustainable economic benefits for end users such as airlines. The shutdown halted progress that was being made at nine test sites 

across the country. Listed below are two examples of the impacts of the April 

2013 (which lasted one week) sequestration furloughs and the October 2013 

shutdown (which lasted 16 days). 

The Southern California test site was due to begin final implementation of procedure changes in December 2014. Due to the April and October 2013 stand 

down of the teams, the implementation date was delayed to February 2016. 

Those delays prevent estimated savings of $10–16 million a year in fuel, and 

34,000–78,000 metric tons of carbon. A significant part of the delays due to the 

fact that although the teams may have been on hold for only one or two weeks 

at a time, they require months to reassemble. 

The Houston test site was due to begin final implementation in December 2013. 

That was delayed until May 2014 due to the April 2013 furloughs. Houston has 

just begun using its new procedures (discussed later), but without the shutdown 

and furloughs, it could have begun cost and fuel savings six months earlier. 

When Fully Funded, NextGen is Already Showing Results 

While NextGen has struggled with funding uncertainty, there are also success stories of modernization projects that have already been implemented across the country. These changes assist our controllers in increasing efficiency and capacity of the 

NAS while maintaining the highest safety standards. Below are a few such examples of how NextGen projects are already benefiting the NAS: 

1. Houston—Optimization of Airspace & Procedures in the Metroplex (OAPM): 

OAPM study teams rely on current aircraft navigation capabilities to enhance 

airport arrival and departure paths, provide diverging departure paths to get 

aircraft off the ground more quickly, and add more direct, high-altitude Area 

Navigation (RNAV) navigation routes between metroplexes. These changes reduce fuel consumption, providing economic benefits for airlines as well as benefits for the environment. 

Houston is an example of a success story. However, while the Houston test site 

was due to begin final implementation in December 2013, it was delayed until 

May 2014 due to the April 2013 furloughs. Through the collaboration and hard 

work of the facilities in the Houston area, a new type of air traffic control 

began on May 28, 2014. A total of 61 new procedures (50 new procedures and 

11 modified or amended procedures) were implemented for Houston Center 

(ZHU), Houston TRACON (I90), Houston Intercontinental Airport (IAH), and 

the satellite airports including David Wayne Hooks Memorial (DWH), William 

P. Hobby (HOU), George Bush Intercontinental (IAH), and Sugar Land Regional (SGR). 

United Airlines is the main carrier at IAH, with Southwest being the focus carrier at Houston Hobby Airport (HOU). These airlines will see the most benefits 

from the implementation of procedures that allow aircraft to be flown more efficiently with less altitude holds and speed restrictions. The deployment of the 

Houston OAPM should be the playbook for future implementations. The airlines’ fuel savings from the implementation of Houston’s OAPM are projected 

to be $9.2–$26 million each year. 

2. Gulf of Mexico—Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B): ADS– 

B, one of the cornerstone components of NextGen, is a form of surveillance that 

will replace traditional radar as the primary surveillance method in the NAS. 

ADS–B involves the broadcast of the GPS-derived position report of an aircraft 

or vehicle. As this technology continues to evolve and aircraft equip with ADS– 

B Avionics, controllers will see an increase in surveillance coverage not provided by traditional radar sources. At this time, the FAA has completed the 

physical infrastructure of the ADS–B network. Even more importantly, they 

have successfully integrated ADS–B data into existing ATC automation systems, meaning that air traffic controllers can see the new ADS–B information. 

The benefit of having increased surveillance coverage is limited to the number 

of aircraft that have certified Minimum Operational Performance Standards 

(MOPSB) avionics (this meets the certification requirements in the FAA ADS– 

B Mandate of 2020). As of May 31, 2014, the installation of FUSION has 

23 

reached over 30 facilities and Houston ARTCC (ZHU) is using ADS–B in the 

Gulf of Mexico. For many years non-radar control was the only option for controllers when working air traffic through and in the Gulf of Mexico. As ADS– 

B became a reality, controllers and pilots have benefitted tremendously from 

this technology. Aircraft flying westbound from Florida have been able to reduce delays because they can now remain in radar control when deviating 

south of course due to weather. In addition, helicopters flying to the oil platforms in the Gulf are delayed less frequently during poor weather because controllers are able to see them on radar now instead of working a manual nonradar grid system. 

3. Colorado—Wide Area Multilateration (WAM): WAM is an independent, cooperative surveillance technology based on the same time difference of arrival principles that are used on an airport surface. Several ground-based receiving stations listen to signals transmitted from an aircraft and then mathematically 

calculate its position in three dimensions. This data is transmitted to screens 

viewed by air traffic controllers for separation of aircraft. WAM can interface 

to terminal or en-route automation systems. 

WAM is beneficial in locations with limited visibility. For example, controllers 

at Denver Center (ZDV) were handicapped when providing air traffic control 

services because they lacked radar services below 17,000 feet. With the deployment of WAM, controllers can actually see the aircraft moving on the surface 

of many airports and aircraft remain in radar control for their entire flight. 

This has two very significant consequences for controllers: controllers are able 

to reduce separation due to the elimination of non-radar procedures and new 

procedures that reduce departure delays are being created thanks to better surveillance. 

4. Phoenix—Performance Based Navigation (PBN): The development and implementation of PBN will create more defined routing for aircraft, which ultimately increases the number of aircraft that controllers can direct. These new 

procedures will improve the fuel efficiency for the airlines and create safer and 

more efficient procedures for air traffic. 

In Phoenix, aircraft arriving from the east were being delayed or given excessive vectors due to traffic congestion. Teams consisting of the FAA, NATCA, 

and the users met to establish PBN/RNP procedures that have shown benefits 

to the airlines, business jets, and general aviation aircraft by modifying the 

flight routes and avoiding that congestion. 

While Phoenix is a case study in the benefits that PBN can give to the aviation 

industry as a whole, the government shutdown had a tremendous effect on 

PBN projects across the country because the schedule for designing and implementing PBN procedures is precise and any delay causes procedures to slip to 

future production dates. Every time this happens the new benefits are lost for 

that time period and it affects other procedures in a domino effect. A lot of time 

and effort—and therefore money—was spent in assessing what procedures 

could be developed and implemented along with their timelines. 

As a result, everything had to be rescheduled. Some projects slipped and some 

procedures were cancelled. Each time something like this happens, funding has 

been wasted because the work has to be redone to meet requirements. Many 

benefits have already been lost and will continue to be lost due to unstable 

funding. 

5. Memphis—Re-Categorization of Separation Standards (RECAT): Experts in 

wake turbulence, safety, and risk analysis have determined that decreasing 

separation between similar type aircraft is as safe, or safer than, current 

standards and increases efficiency and capacity, meaning that like other 

NextGen projects, RECAT has the capacity to enhance safety, reduce delays, 

save fuel, and reduce aviation’s environmental impact. 

Memphis Tower and TRACON were the first facilities to apply the new standards on November 1, 2012. The recategorization of Wake Turbulence is one of 

the most beneficial improvements when comparing the cost of implementation 

with the savings by the users. In Memphis, FedEx has been pleased with the 

results. Departure delays were reduced by 74 percent in the first week of implementation. Controllers have been very supportive of this technology and the 

tools provided to them identifying the weight category of each aircraft. 

6. Newark –Data Communications (DataComm): DataComm will reduce frequency 

congestion by allowing the controller and pilot to communicate directly via digital communication (much like a text message). It will also reduce confusion 

24 

because the message will be in print form and not copied over the frequency. 

A majority of these messages will be integrated into the flight deck avionics 

to help save time and remove issues of incorrect data entry. 

One beneficial application of DataComm is evident during severe weather, 

when an aircraft may receive several different routes within a period of 30 minutes. With DataComm, revised routes can be sent with a few clicks to the flight 

deck, saving valuable time as the aircraft is rerouted. This is especially helpful 

when there is a language barrier that could occur with non-English speaking 

pilots. DataComm also benefits surface operations by saving time, which reduces the backlog that could otherwise occur when aircraft are holding for a 

departure clearance. 

Newark Airport (EWR) has been conducting a trial of issuing clearances via 

DataComm. While the program has a long way to go, it is apparent the benefits 

of this initiative will be substantial for controllers and users. 

The 2013 government shutdown affected ERAM implementation, which in turn 

affected the schedule of implementation of DataComm functionality at the NAP 

(National Application Processor) Realm in Atlanta ARTCC (ZTL). The NAP 

Realm contains the logic for aircraft logons. There are two NAP Realms, one 

at Salt Lake Center and the other at Atlanta Center. If one fails, the other is 

used as a backup. This means that the key site, Salt Lake City Tower (SLC), 

will not have logon redundancy in the event of a failure, and controllers would 

have to abandon DataComm functionality and revert to voice communication. 

7. Atlanta—Equivalent Lateral Spacing Operations (ELSO): ELSO is a procedure 

that enables the world’s busiest airport to depart aircraft on diverging course 

much closer than in the past. ELSO, developed by the Mitre Corporation in 

2011, added two departure routes at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International 

Airport (ATL) due to an updated separation standard. The introduction of 

ELSO at ATL enables simultaneous and successive diverging departure operations by creating two departure tracks for each runway end during normal 

runway operations. When the weather is not conducive or the pilots are unwilling or unable to fly the RNAV routes, controllers revert back to the standard 

divergence. The angle between departure routes decreased from 15 degrees to 

10 degrees, and the time between departures was reduced from two minutes 

to one minute, taking advantage of RNAV technology. Controllers at ATL now 

clear between eight and twelve more planes for departure each hour. Controllers rely on ELSO to expedite departures at this busy airport. The airlines 

serving ATL have experienced reduced delays and controllers have a more predictable course that is set for the aircraft. Initial reports are positive from both 

pilots and controllers. 

The advantages of ELSO have somewhat of a domino effect. Because ELSO reduces the need for a triple departure configuration at ATL, there is a reduction 

in controller workload. This also spurs fuel and time savings for departing aircraft. 

NATCA Recommendations 

The aviation community and the FAA all see the value and benefits of NextGen 

modernization projects. We are working collaboratively to complete testing and implementation of some key programs, as described above. At this time, NextGen 

needs assurances from Congress that it will provide stable and predictable funding 

for the duration of the projects. Below are NATCA’s formal recommendations for 

how Congress can assist the FAA, NATCA, and other stakeholders in successfully 

completing NextGen modernization projects. 

• Stable and Predictable Funding: NextGen must be fully funded through the regular appropriations process. Attempting to fund these projects with continuing 

resolutions, or worse, not at all, as happened during the October 2013 shutdown, has significant detrimental effect on NextGen progress. 

• Continued Collaboration: Congress and the FAA should continue to focus on collaboration and stakeholder involvement in order to set and reach realistic deadlines. 

• Streamlining the Rulemaking Process: The FAA’s long and laborious rulemaking 

process costs valuable time. Changes are needed in order to streamline the rulemaking process to better implement new efficiencies. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Rinaldi. Thank you very 

much for being here. 

25 

Mr. Beck, welcome. We look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF GARY BECK, VICE PRESIDENT—FLIGHT 

OPERATIONS, ALASKA AIRLINES 

Mr. BECK. Thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell, Ranking Member 

Ayotte, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Gary Beck 

and I am the Vice President of Flight Operations for Alaska Airlines. It is my pleasure to testify today on the safety impact and 

efficacy of NextGen programs, specifically the Greener Skies initiative. 

I also serve as the Co-Chair of the NextGen Implementation 

Working Group, and I am on the Subcommittee of the NextGen Advisory Committee. I am appearing today in my Alaskan Airlines’ 

capacity. 

Greener Skies began in 2008 to improve the efficiency of flights 

landing at SeaTac Airport, thereby reducing fuel usage, carbon 

emissions, and noise pollution. Greener Skies is the evolution of a 

long term initiative of Alaska, started in the mid-1990s, to use Required Navigation Performance or RNP technology to improve safety, enhance sustainability, and decrease the environmental impact 

of our flight operations. 

Alaska was the first U.S. air carrier to invest in RNP and we are 

further along than any other airline in using these technologies to 

benefit our customers and our partners. 

Greener Skies seeks to increase airspace efficiency by implementing rule changes so that aircraft can approach the airport 

with substantially reduced separation and do so from straight and 

curved paths. 

This is occurring in two phases. First, we have instituted new arrival procedures that take the aircraft from cruising altitude to a 

few thousand feet above the ground. Second, we are pursuing a 

rule change that will address the aircraft’s final approach from 

that lower altitude all the way to the runway. 

The new protocols allow the aircraft to make a continuous descent rather than requiring it to level off intermittently. Basically, 

NextGen arrivals are akin to an airplane sliding down the banister 

rather than taking the stairs. The impacts so far have been significant. The new procedures have cut 17 miles from previous flight 

paths. 

That may not sound like much, but when considering that an estimated 30,000 aircraft fly this arrival path each year, that is from 

all airlines, not just Alaska, we can expect a reduction in CO2 emissions from the decreased fuel usage equivalent to removing 4,100 

automobiles from the road. When considering the growth in air 

traffic forecasts for Seattle, the benefits will only increase. 

Despite these advancements, phase two of Greener Skies has encountered set-backs in its approval process. It is time to extend 

these benefits all the way to the runway. 

As an early adopter and champion of these initiatives, Alaska 

Airlines hopes we can count on congressional support to advance 

three key issues. My written testimony expands on these requests. 

First, approve the FAA rule change for ‘‘Established on RNP,’’ allowing aircraft to approach the runway on NextGen flight paths. 

Two, publish and implement the amended RNP approach proceVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
26 

dures to ensure they are used to their fullest extent as quickly as 

possible. Three, support an FAA post-implementation benefits analysis of the Greener Skies initiative to provide verifiable data on the 

benefits and impact of the program. 

The airline industry benefits greatly from NextGen policies and 

procedures, and Alaska Airlines has been a strong proponent of 

their implementation. Safety, environmental stewardship, and customer satisfaction all follow from these initiatives. 

We could be doing much more. We depend upon your support 

and our continued partnership with the FAA to ensure that 

NextGen and the Greener Skies initiative create as much benefit 

as possible. 

This concludes my oral testimony, and I am pleased to answer 

any questions from the Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Beck follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GARY BECK, VICE PRESIDENT—FLIGHT OPERATIONS, 

ALASKA AIRLINES

Chairwoman Cantwell, Ranking Member Ayotte, and members of the Subcommittee: 

My name is Gary Beck and I am the vice president of Flight Operations for Alaska Airlines. It is my pleasure to testify today on behalf of Alaska Airlines on the 

safety, impact and efficacy of NextGen programs, specifically the Greener Skies initiative. In addition to my role at Alaska Airlines, I also serve as the co-chair of the 

NextGen Implementation Working Group focused on expanding the use of Performance-Based Navigation across the country, and I am on the subcommittee of the 

NextGen Advisory Committee. I submit today’s testimony in my Alaska Airlines capacity. 

I. Background on the Greener Skies Initiative 

Greener Skies began in 2008 as a partnership between Alaska Airlines, The Boeing Company, and the Port of Seattle. Our goal was to improve the efficiency of 

flights landing at SeaTac airport, thereby reducing fuel usage, carbon emissions and 

noise pollution. Greener Skies is the evolution of a long-term initiative at Alaska 

to use Required Navigation Performance (RNP) technology to improve safety, enhance sustainability and decrease the environmental impact of our flight operations. 

Alaska has long been a pioneer in integrating RNP technologies into our operations. Our work in this area can be traced back to the mid-1990s when we used 

RNP-guided flight paths to direct our aircraft operating out of the Juneau airport, 

a location known for its bad weather and mountainous terrain. The challenges posed 

by the Juneau environment spurred our entrance into this space, leading Alaska to 

invest early in innovative technologies that could help us more reliably and safely 

serve communities throughout the state of Alaska. In so doing, our corporate leaders 

took a risk in being the first major U.S. air carrier to invest in RNP, an unproven 

technology at that time. That risk was certainly worth taking, and because of that 

early work Alaska is further along than any other airline in using these technologies to benefit our customers and partners. 

From its inception at the Juneau airport, we have taken RNP technologies to the 

next level with the Greener Skies initiative. In 2010 the FAA, with whom we have 

a long history of successful collaboration, declared our project in Seattle a NextGen 

initiative. The primary objective of the project was to study the feasibility of two 

instrument approach streams to parallel dependent runways (runways separated by 

2,500 to 4,300 feet) with: 

• one aircraft arriving on a straight-in flight approach, 

• an adjacent aircraft arriving on a curved path to a parallel runway, 

• and both considered ‘‘established’’ on the approach, with at least one of the aircraft using NextGen guidance technology. 

Today, aircraft must be separated by 1,000 feet vertically or three nautical miles 

laterally until they are ‘‘established’’ on straight-in final segments to dependent parallel runways. One of the key goals of NextGen is to implement rule changes that 

allow aircraft to be established on both curved and straight-in paths, allowing for 

27 

reduced separation between the aircraft of just 1.5 nautical miles diagonally. The 

key benefit of reduced separation is increased airspace efficiency. Thirteen airports 

in the National Airspace System (NAS) would benefit from this rule change. 

The initial phase of the Greener Skies initiative was to develop and implement 

two Area Navigation (RNAV) arrivals and six RNP approaches. In navigational parlance, arrivals are published flight procedures that take the aircraft from its cruising altitude to a much lower altitude, typically a few thousand feet, in the airport 

vicinity. Approaches are procedures that take the aircraft from that position all the 

way to the runway. The primary benefit of the NextGen procedures is that they 

allow the aircraft to make a continuous decent rather than requiring it to level off 

intermittently. A helpful analogy is that NextGen arrivals are akin to the plane sliding down the banister rather than taking the stairs. 

In the summer of 2013, after several years of exhaustive trials, training, safety 

assessments and FAA airspace negotiations, we were able to publish and implement 

the two arrival procedures outlined in phase one of Greener Skies (HAWKZ and 

MARNR). We overcame some initial challenges and at the end of August, with support of the FAA, all qualified and equipped aircraft and airlines arriving in Seattle 

from the north, south, and west began using the NextGen arrival procedures. This 

success continues today. 

We are currently in phase two of Greener Skies, and our objective is to obtain 

a waiver to the Air Traffic Control Handbook that would allow the implementation 

of the ‘‘Established on RNP’’ procedure. This mechanism will allow for the reduced 

separation of 1.5 miles between approaching aircraft, and for those aircraft to approach on both straight-in and curved paths. This reduction in separation is a key 

factor in reaping the full benefits of the Greener Skies initiative. 

II. Benefits of Greener Skies 

We have seen significant positive impacts from the implementation of our two 

RNAV arrival procedures. For aircraft landing to the south, the HAWKZ procedure 

provides a 17-mile savings over previous landing procedures. That may not sound 

like much, but when considering that an estimated 30,000 aircraft fly this arrival 

path each year (from all airlines, not just Alaska), the fuel burn reduction quickly 

adds up. With an average of 44 gallons of fuel saved per flight, we can expect 1.3 

million gallons of annual savings for aircraft arriving Seattle. Early modeling shows 

an expected reduction in CO2 emissions equivalent to 4,100 automobiles. And when 

considering the growth in air traffic forecast for Seattle, the benefits will only increase. Additionally, we have worked closely with the Port of Seattle to ensure the procedure designs do not affect the Port’s long-standing noise-abatement corridors. The 

flight procedures are optimized to concentrate flights over Puget Sound and compatible land uses, reducing the number of people who experience aircraft overflights. 

Greener Skies has allowed Alaska to continually find innovative ways to serve our 

customers, the communities in which we work and reduce our environmental impact. 

III. Challenges 

Our integration of NextGen programs has been a marked success. But despite 

these benefits, we face challenges in fully implementing NextGen and ensuring our 

initiatives have the greatest positive impact they can. We have experienced significant success implementing the two new arrival procedures as part of phase one of 

the Greener Skies initiative. But the second phase, which will deepen the impact 

of this program by optimizing our approach protocols in tandem with the arrival 

procedures, has encountered setbacks in its approval process. In short, the benefits 

we gain during the decent from cruising altitude to the beginning of our final approach are considerable; extending those benefits all the way to the runway is our 

next goal. 

As an early adopter and champion of these initiatives, Alaska Airlines hopes we 

can count on Congressional support to advance three key issues: 

a. Approve the FAA rule change for ‘‘Established on RNP’’ 

The rule changes that follow from the ‘‘Established on RNP’’ waiver are crucial 

to NextGen implementation. Roadblocks exist in this space, in many cases understandably. But approval of the rule change is a necessary first step to ensure 

the beneficial impacts of NextGen. 

b. Publish and implement the amended RNP approach procedure 

Though the approach procedures were published in 2013, they are not fully 

used—with the notable exceptions of the Denver and Portland airports. These 

procedures must be amended and fully implemented. We currently foresee a 

minimum two-year delay from initial publication, which further stalls the beneVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
28 

fits of NextGen. Additionally, continuity in the teams developing these procedures will reduce the time to implementation. 

c. Support an FAA post-implementation benefits analysis of the Greener Skies initiative 

It is important that we have verifiable data on the benefits and impact of the 

Greener Skies initiative. We have begun culling that data ourselves, but we ask 

the FAA to take a leadership role in developing a benefit analysis in order to 

validate the metrics we use to measure the impact of Greener Skies. 

IV. Conclusion 

The airline industry benefits greatly from NextGen policies and procedures, and 

Alaska Airlines has been a strong proponent of their implementation. Safety, environmental stewardship and customer satisfaction all follow from these initiatives. 

But we could be doing much more. Arrival procedures have seen dramatic improvement. But we have an opportunity to make further progress by integrating our approach procedures with those arrival protocols. We depend upon your support and 

our continued partnership with the FAA to ensure that NextGen and the Greener 

Skies initiative are as impactful at the national and local level as we know they 

can be. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. We will start a round of questioning of 5 minutes each from my colleagues. 

I think in just summarizing where I see this discussion because 

all of you have added some very good input, I think the public first 

of all does not understand all the acronyms and what it all means, 

they just know the promise that we keep saying this is going to deliver to them in more fuel efficient planes. 

And it looks like half of the money we have spent so far is on 

this ERAM system, which is supposedly, on its way, I guess might 

be a way of saying it. 

But I guess my question is, you know, we have this almost chicken and egg situation with the industry. On one end, Mr. Beck has 

moved—his airline has moved—very quickly in establishing even 

prior to this, a Greener Skies navigation system, again, focused on 

the terminal end, but you know, made the investment, moved 

ahead. 

I guess what I am saying is we want to see more of a partnership 

with the FAA and industry, because industry also needs to make 

these same implementations, but if that progress—I am not sure 

‘‘stalemated’’ is the right word, but delayed—then where we are 

right now is we have spent $5 billion, the industry may not be 

moving fast enough, it wants to move faster, so we are kind of 

doing an across the board let’s implement each aspect of the software as opposed to maybe the most leveraged things. 

Now I know the ERAM system is one of the most leveraged 

things that we have to get done, but when I look at this end of the 

table, Mr. Beck, I think well, why not implement as the NextGen 

Advisory Committee suggested, making Performance Based Navigation a very, very high priority, and why not implement across the 

country a more rapid deployment of the system. 

So, my understanding is we have the Metroplex in—is it Dallas? 

VOICE. Houston. 

Senator CANTWELL. Houston, that is going to go next, but then 

the next set, it is going to take us like six years to implement. 

Can’t we move faster at getting these Performance Based Navigation systems in place sooner while we are working obviously on the 

back end system, because they obviously did not need the ERAM 

system before they started making changes. 

29 

So, I guess what I am asking, and I would love everybody’s input, 

are there some more low hanging fruit that brings in the actual 

partnerships faster and the actual realized savings faster than just 

saying to the taxpayer we are going to spend another $5 billion before we see the major benefits? 

So, anybody who wants to answer that. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell. If I can 

start, I think communicating about NextGen has been one of our 

great challenges, and one of the things we are focused on is to try 

to improve that communication, and part of that communication is 

to point out that we are very close to completing that foundational 

phase. 

Regardless of whether this was going to be called NextGen’’ or 

something else, we were operating the air traffic control system 

with equipment from the 1970s and the 1980s, and it had to be upgraded, and a big portion of NextGen was to upgrade all that 

equipment. 

So, we are closing in on the completion of that, and that will enable additional technologies, but the other focus has very much 

been, at least in the last year, on working with industry through 

the NAC, understanding the priorities, and then trying to match 

those priorities with our budget and our capabilities, and what is 

ready to be rolled out. 

PBN is clearly front and center in that. The Houston—— 

Senator CANTWELL. Performance Based Navigation. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, Performance Based. ‘‘Metroplex’’ is even a 

better term. The Houston Metroplex has been a great success, and 

the new routes are achieving an 80 percent usage rate, so we have 

ironed out some of the issues about usage. We are seeing a very 

successful program. We are receiving e-mails from pilots who are 

raving about it versus other problems they have experienced in the 

past. 

Senator CANTWELL. Great, so why not move up that deployment 

more rapidly, because my understanding of what is going to happen is we are going to see them come online and then over the next 

4 years, we will see like a little dribble of—— 

Mr. WHITAKER. So, we have a dozen more in the next three 

years, and we have, I think, a pretty aggressive schedule. The issue 

is that every airport is different, every airspace redesign is different. 

So, we have certainly learned lessons from Greener Skies and 

from other efforts, but we feel that Houston really shows all of 

those efforts coming together, and I know Paul can comment on 

that. We had a very close collaboration, and I think that collaboration has been what has made it so successful. 

So, there have been learnings from the past, but it is clearly a 

focus of the NextGen Advisory Committee and the FAA. 

Senator CANTWELL. Anybody else want to comment on that? 

Mr. RINALDI. I would like to, Chairman. Mike Whitaker is absolutely correct. Houston is completely different but what we have 

now is a good play book to move forward. Houston took somewhere 

between 18 months and 24 months to develop, and instead of doing 

one or two approaches like we did with Greener Skies in Seattle, 

30 

we did the whole Metroplex, 61 procedures. Monumental task. We 

did not know how that was going to work. 

Controllers trained right up to the last day, and the way they 

were working airplanes and the way the pilots were flying the airplanes the day before, on May 28, changed with a snap of the fingers at six in the morning on May 29. 

It was a huge success. We now have a good platform where we 

don’t just change one or two procedures within Seattle, but maybe 

we can go back in there and actually re-do all of the procedures 

within Seattle and see the benefits. 

So, I think getting Houston under our belt and actually having 

that platform gives us the ability to be successful. North Texas will 

be next, and then we will start looking at Southern California and 

Northern California also. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. Senator Ayotte? 

Senator AYOTTE. I want to thank all of you for being here. Mr. 

Whitaker, I love that we share New Hampshire as home, so thank 

you for being here, I appreciate it. 

I wanted to follow up on Senator Cantwell’s question about the 

PBN, Performance Based Navigation procedures, so we are not all 

using acronyms. 

As I understand the IG’s recommendation, in terms of what the 

Chair has asked about more quickly implementing these measures 

across the country, I read his report to say that he has recommended that you complete an action plan and develop milestones to increase the use of the PBN procedures. 

So, could you comment on that, and I hope you will commit to 

doing that, because as you had the experience you were talking 

about in Dallas and taking those lessons from it, and looking to 

what was the absolutely great point the Chair made, how do we 

accelerate this procedure across the country? 

I would love to hear your response to what they recommend so 

that we can take those lessons and more quickly move forward 

with this so people can really see the tangible benefits of NextGen. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Thank you, Senator. We have looked at the work 

that the IG has done on PBN, Performance Based Navigation, as 

well as the NAC. The NAC has a working group that focuses just 

on implementation, because it is such a high priority, and we are 

fusing the results of that work into action plans around how to execute more efficiently. 

I will say that we have reached a tipping point. We have—over 

half the routes are now PBN routes. When we first started this 

process, I think we had a bit of a first come/first serve basis, rather 

than having a holistic plan for implementation. 

So, we are going through the previous routes and culling out 

ones that do not have utilization or may somehow clog the system, 

and then we are focused on much more of a holistic national plan 

for the route network. 

Metroplex is a big part of that because that allows us to get at 

some of the congestion most efficiently. The PBN implementation 

is a key focus of the NAC and clearly a priority for us as well. 

Senator AYOTTE. Mr. Hampton, do you have a comment on this 

discussion, having obviously looked at this in your report? 

31 

Mr. HAMPTON. Yes. The FAA did concur with our recommendation, and they fully understand the importance of PBN. However, 

I want to point out that maximizing the benefits of Performance 

Based Navigation relies on a couple of things. One is adjusting the 

Controller Handbook, and that was done in Houston, and a lot of 

work is underway, I would say roughly half of the 15 ones on target have been completed. 

So, you need an integrated approach. Not only that, you need 

training for the controllers at that specific facility. That will help 

maximize the benefits. At some point, there will be an additional 

controller tool set that will be needed to help them better manage 

aircraft. 

I think what you will see coming out from the NAC report and 

FAA’s response is a very integrated approach to developing PBN. 

You need all the pieces to line up to deliver the benefits, and I 

think the FAA is working very well with industry and the controllers in that regard. 

Senator AYOTTE. Mr. Hampton, I wanted to follow up with you 

on some of the other findings that you had in the report. 

You talked about the measures that have been implemented and 

talked about the things FAA has done, but I also saw a number 

of issues that you raised in your report, including slow progress in 

meeting deadlines and implementing core components of the program, cost increases and schedule delays, and long-standing programmatic and organizational challenges. 

So, is this a funding issue or is this an issue that is focused on 

what needs to be done from the FAA, and can you help me understand how we deal with some of the issues that I see in your report 

that are obviously independent of funding? 

Mr. HAMPTON. Thank you for the question. The problems that we 

have seen with NextGen and execution are not traceable to an 

issue of funding. 

Congress had provided FAA in the neighborhood of between $5 billion to $6 billion for NextGen. In the 2008–2009 time frame, the 

appropriators gave more money than FAA requested to accelerate 

key NextGen technologies. 

Money may be an issue going forward, but in the past, it was 

not. We do recognize that the sequester did cause some disruptions 

to FAA programs, but by and large, money has not been a problem 

with the execution of NextGen. It is more traceable to defining requirements and developing an executable plan. 

Senator AYOTTE. Is that the number one issue, you think, defining requirements and—— 

Mr. HAMPTON. Yes, that is the root cause of most of the problems 

with NextGen. Another point is integrating and developing capabilities at specific locations. I think the FAA is getting to the point 

now in response to the NAC focusing on a set of priorities. 

The priorities the NAC recommended—Performance Based Navigation, surface operations, closely spaced parallel runways, and 

DataComm, DataComm is a little further off—represent—are pretty good places to go. There are opportunities for tremendous benefits. 

So, it is a question of focus. FAA cannot afford to advance 

NextGen on a broad front, but rather on a more focused and conVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
32 

centrated way, and I think their budgets and plans need to reflect 

that. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. Senator Booker? 

STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator BOOKER. Can you repeat what you just said? You said 

the FAA cannot afford to do it on a broad front? 

Mr. HAMPTON. Let me rephrase that. The past plans were relatively unconstrained, and that hurt FAA’s ability to actually execute. I think it is the best practice throughout business and industry to focus on several key areas and execute them, go to the areas 

that have the most positive return on benefit. 

Senator BOOKER. So, help me understand, just for my concern. 

The airport systems in the region of the country in which I am in, 

in New Jersey, Newark Liberty is the fifteenth busiest airport in 

North America, and once you combine that with JFK and 

LaGuardia, you have now got the busiest airport system in the entire United States, which makes us one of the busiest airport systems globally. 

So, my concern is with the numbers of near misses, the challenges we have—Mr. Rinaldi and I have talked about staffing 

issues and the like—safety is the number one concern that I have. 

While I am thrilled about the long-term impact that the implementation of NextGen will have, I mean extraordinary benefits environmentally, and I can go on, I am very, very concerned about 

the speed with which we are addressing the issues in the Newark 

Liberty Airport area. 

You hit right to the root of what my concerns were, which is why 

are we moving as slow, why can we not move faster? So, you are 

telling me it is not a funding issue at all? 

Mr. HAMPTON. In the past, it has not been a funding issue. We 

did a report last year and it focused on some of the causes. Chief 

among them was an inability to define requirements, developing an 

executable plan, and an agency culture that was resistant to embracing the NextGen culture and change, and making significant 

changes in how air traffic is managed. 

Senator BOOKER. So, lack of a plan, some technical issues? 

Mr. HAMPTON. Correct. 

Senator BOOKER. These are the issues that have been sort of 

causing the slow pace going backward, but as you look at the advancing forward—let’s go with the next year to 2 years, is the funding that we are looking at—because right now, the Fiscal Year 

2015 budget submitted to Congress contains around a $174 million 

shortfall compared to the Fiscal Year 2014 related to the NextGen 

budget. 

I look at that discrepancy, and I am wondering if the research 

and development portion, which was cut approximately $43 million—is this causing a strain basically in terms of the FAA’s ability 

to address the challenges? 

I do not mind if Mr. Whitaker or Mr. Hampton answers that. 

Again, I am proud of New Jersey’s role. I mean, you know, the 

facility in Atlantic City, we are focused really on the DataComm 

33 

technology that you discussed, and I am really proud of the role my 

state is playing in all this. 

But again, that budget differential, how is that going to impact 

the future implementation? 

Mr. HAMPTON. On that question, sir, thank you very much. That 

is the point we have made, is going forward, it is very important 

for the FAA to clearly lay out what its requirements are in terms 

of funding for NextGen, sustaining the NAS, and also what the key 

R&D elements that still have to be done to advance some of the 

more advanced concepts. I think that is an important question particularly as FAA reauthorization comes forward. 

The FAA has to balance sustaining the existing system, running 

the system, which they do very well, and introducing new capabilities. I think it is paramount that the FAA gives this committee a 

clear understanding of what its resource requirements are. I think 

that is essential. 

Senator BOOKER. Mr. Whitaker? 

Mr. WHITAKER. Thank you, Senator. If I may just comment, I 

think one area—one challenge we have with NextGen—is that people do not realize it was designed as a twenty-year endeavor. So, 

if you look at our funding stream, 20 years, $20 billion program, 

the first time we hit that funding level was 2009. So, we are not 

that far down the path as it was laid out. 

One of the areas where we do not agree with the IG is that we 

view this as an endeavor that you approach in segments. You do 

not have to define all of the details of what is going to happen in 

2025. We take it in segments, and as those segments complete, we 

start focusing more on the second segment. 

We have had discussions back and forth for quite a while with 

the IG over this approach. We follow the OMB approach with respect to that. 

But it is important that we keep it funded at the appropriate 

level. 

Senator BOOKER. So, the differential in funding is a concern of 

yours? 

Mr. WHITAKER. All of these programs—the individual components are six to eight year programs, and you have to make investment decisions going forward. If you do not have funding predictability, it is very hard to do that. We do not want less money and 

we do not want more money. We want the amount of money that 

was built into the program so we can execute. 

Senator BOOKER. So, in the final seconds I have two things. One 

is the clarity of funding requests seems to be what Mr. Hampton 

is saying in terms of a plan to understand, because again, I feel 

like a little bit, pun intended, that I am flying blind in terms of 

understanding what the future needs are. 

Is this differential in funding really something I should concern 

myself with or not, and the conflicting testimony I am hearing, at 

least reading into it, has me a little concerned, and I know my 

team, we want to dig a little deeper into that so we can properly 

advocate whether it is resources or whether it is some of the technical issues. I want to make sure that we are applying the proper 

energy in the proper place. 

34 

And then I just want to say one more time, the most congested 

airport in the United States of America, the most flights going in 

and out of the Kennedy/LaGuardia/Newark Airports, the most pollution being spewed into our air, what these small parts are making. 

This is a serious crisis in my opinion in terms of the number of 

challenges we are having with safety in our area, and the urgency 

to get this new technology implemented as quickly as possible. 

So, for you to say to me a twenty-year plan, that is all nice, but 

I am really focused on how quickly can we create an environment 

of safety in the Nation’s most busiest air traffic area, where we are 

facing, I think, straining the capacity of a limited number of air 

traffic controllers relying on technology frankly that has been 

around for many decades, perhaps even before I was born. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Thank you. 

Senator BOOKER. Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Senator Begich? 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, thank you 

for hosting this hearing. I want to follow up, Mr. Whitaker, on 

what Senator Booker just talked about, and maybe Mr. Hampton, 

I think your point was in the plan that the FAA does, you have 

to make sure you are doing the best cost/benefit analysis, in other 

words, the highest benefit as quickly as possible and defining those 

areas. That is what I kind of heard. 

Does your plan, Mr. Whitaker, address it that way or is it kind 

of the classic what I call ‘‘legislative plan,’’ which is, you know, 

shop around everywhere to make everyone happy as best as you 

can because you will get a call from a Senator if you do not. How 

is your plan designed? 

Mr. WHITAKER. Well, there are really two parts to this. We have 

a very detailed implementation plan for NextGen that goes into detail on how all the programs fit together and how they roll out over 

time. We are executing on that plan. 

In addition to that, we do have the ability to deliver benefits, and 

the NextGen Advisory Committee is designed to allow us to give 

industry an opportunity to reach consensus and tell us what is important for implementation. 

I think it is one of the most useful tools that we have, and we 

have had—— 

Senator BEGICH. That is based on, you know, risk, safety, some 

sort of levels of priority that you go after first? 

Mr. WHITAKER. When we are dealing with the NextGen Advisory 

Committee, it is really commercial need and where the benefits are 

going to come from. The safety and risk factors are cooked into the 

underlying plan that we have. 

We take that very valuable feedback, and that is why we have 

developed these four areas that we are going to be focused on over 

the next one to 3 years to deliver those benefits. 

Senator BEGICH. As you know, with Alaska, NextGen, ADS–B, 

all this was pioneered in many ways in Alaska because of the 

unique flying conditions that we have there. 

35 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, sir. 

Senator BEGICH. Let me ask you specifically about ADS–B technology. In regards to Alaska, I know whenever we talk to the FAA, 

the FAA always says, you know, we have covered Alaska, and that 

is true, 13,000 feet and up, but because of our general aviation capacity, which is 16 times more pilots licensed in Alaska than in any 

other place in the country, the 3,000 to 5,000 really does not get 

covered as aggressively as it could be. 

We have areas like Prince William Sound, which is a huge area, 

as well as up in the Arctic with regards to the North Slope, which 

has a lot of activity, especially now with OCS development, a lot 

of activity with plane activity. 

What is the plan to install more potential ground stations to improve ADS–B for general aviation in Alaska? I get the commercial. 

Generally, I fly on a lot of small planes that you might not consider 

commercial, but in Alaska, we consider them commercial. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. 

Senator BEGICH. Because that is how we get around. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. 

Senator BEGICH. So, what is the plan to increase that capacity, 

especially in some very high volume areas like I have just described? 

Mr. WHITAKER. So, the baseline program for Alaska was 33 

ADS–B ground stations, and that part has been completed, but we 

do recognize the terrain in Alaska presents unique challenges, so 

there are supplemental programs moving forward. 

We already have one program underway to add eight more ADS– 

B ground stations on the North Slope and in other regions. There 

is work underway in that regard. 

Senator BEGICH. Are you considering satellite coverage? Also, as 

you know, in Alaska, that is one other component we utilize for all 

our communications. We have a combination. Is that part of the 

equation? 

Mr. WHITAKER. Well, the ADS–B takes us to that satellite coverage, so that will ultimately be the primary surveillance mechanism with the radar as a back-up. 

Senator BEGICH. OK; fantastic. Let me ask you before I ask a 

couple of others, I have one specific question. This is very specific, 

very parochial, not that anything I do is parochial, it is all about 

Alaska. 

I was just in Alaska, Nome, Alaska, which is not the easiest 

place to fly into, short runway, high winds. As a matter of fact, I 

flew in with the Coast Guard. Even they were wondering if we 

could make it in. One of the issues they have is—I forget the technical name of the piece of equipment—it is to measure the wind 

speed on the tail end of the runway, which is like near the yaw, 

they don’t have a piece of equipment. 

So, obviously, when you are landing on that airport, it is a short 

runway, and your end of that runway is a mountain, and there are 

high winds, they would like to measure that wind, and they have 

been struggling with the FAA for years—years—to get this one 

piece of equipment that could literally protect and ensure that life 

safety is there. 

36 

In Alaska, we do not have the luxury of long runways sometimes. 

We do not have the luxury of calm conditions. Alaska is a very 

windy place. As you know, in Alaska, it has very large industrial 

areas where a lot of the stuff coming from the Pacific Rim comes 

through that area, and that port and that airport is busy. 

So, can you just put that on your shopping list? We will send you 

something on this. I know it is not you directly, but you are here 

from FAA, you get the tag. 

Mr. WHITAKER. I will. I will follow up and take a look at that, 

Senator. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. If I could just ask one quick last 

question and then I will stop, if that is OK, Madam Chair, and I 

apologize. I just want to ask one very quick one and I will ask this 

to Mr. Rinaldi. 

I know NAC has been working on the issue of the En Route 

Automatic Modernization, so forth and so on. I know both FAA and 

NATCA are pretty pleased about the 20 locations. 

The Alaska Air Traffic Control Center was dropped off that list. 

At one time, they were on it, but we did not have broadband. Now 

we have broadband. 

Can you just give me your quick thoughts on that, what that 

means, not being on that list and being one of those 18 to 20 sites? 

Then I will stop there. 

Mr. RINALDI. I think you are exactly right. Originally, they were 

on the list and nobody wanted to actually test new programs up in 

Alaska because like you said, it is the main mode of transportation 

to many of the remote areas up there. 

The En Route Center in Alaska should be on the ERAM waterfall. It was not on the funding list and it is certainly not on the 

list now as we roll out to our last six facilities, but we would like 

to see all our en route environments on one platform. It just makes 

sense. 

Also, we could tie in the majority of equipment we are using in 

the Lower 48 that would also help in Alaska. So, it would just 

make sense that as we have the team in place and as we finish up 

on the East Coast and ERAM now to move to Alaska and complete 

that, because, you know, every one of our en route environments 

should have the same platform. 

Senator BEGICH. I will end there and maybe I will ask FAA to 

respond at a later time. I had a question for Alaska Airlines, I will 

submit it for the record. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator CANTWELL. Senator Nelson? 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Madam Chairman, realistically, what year are 

we going to have NextGen ready to go, so that is how we are operating our flights? Mr. Whitaker? 

Mr. WHITAKER. NextGen is a whole series of upgrades, so there 

is not a particular moment in time when there will be an announcement that we have flipped a switch and turned it on. 

But I think the key components of NextGen really involve, in addition to the foundational programs that we have talked about, 

37 

data communication into the cockpit so that communications between controllers and pilots can happen that way, and communications can come into the cockpit—— 

Senator NELSON. Right. 

Mr. WHITAKER. You can push a button and it can go into the 

flight management system. 

Senator NELSON. Right. 

Mr. WHITAKER. We achieve what we call four dimensional metering, so when we have an aircraft pushed back from the gate, we 

know what time it is going to take off and what time it is going 

to land, and what the altitudes will be. 

Senator NELSON. Right. 

Mr. WHITAKER. As I was mentioning, NextGen was designed as 

a twenty-year endeavor, and I think if we can stay funded and on 

track, that is where we will end up at the end of 20 years. 

Senator NELSON. Well, are you saying 20 years from now? It was 

a twenty-year endeavor, but it started about ten years ago. So, are 

we 10 years down the road? 

Mr. WHITAKER. So, if you look at the funding profile, the first full 

year of funding was 2009. Our target is to bring those capabilities 

on by 2025. We still have—we have an important step ahead of us, 

which is to define the equipage requirements for aircraft, and when 

that will be mandated, I think that will be probably the defining 

moment of when it all comes together. 

Senator NELSON. Well, that is an awful lot of fuel that we are 

going to use in the meantime on routes that are not direct, the 

added safety of the next generation, situational awareness, and so 

forth. 

Realistically, it is 2025? 

Mr. WHITAKER. I think that is a realistic target; yes. 

Senator NELSON. So, the first funding was in 2009. We have been 

talking about this at least for a decade. 

Mr. WHITAKER. We have, and what happened is in 2003–2004, 

work began to develop the concept of operations for NextGen, and 

that work continued through 2007. You had some level of funding 

from 2007–2008, but in the $100 million range, if you will. 

But as a twenty-year $20 billion program, you are looking at a 

run rate of a billion dollars a year, and that level of funding we 

have never actually touched upon, but we have come close beginning in 2009 and every year since then. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Whitaker, tell us about the progress that 

you can make with the extra funding that the administration has 

requested, and as you share with us, tell us so we can get on the 

record about the sequester, what are the sequester cuts going to do 

to NextGen’s progress? 

Mr. WHITAKER. I think that one of the keys to successfully completing NextGen is to have predictability in the funding stream. I 

think that is first and foremost what we need. 

The many programs that make up NextGen are multi-year programs that require multi-year investment planning. So, more than 

picking a particular level, what we really need to know is what 

those levels will be. 

38 

I think a billion dollars a year is roughly what we have planned 

for in implementing NextGen, and that gives us the predictability 

that we need. 

Sequestration and the Government shutdown put significant 

strain on those programs. We had to pull down many activities 

that then took months to reinstate, and that type of funding uncertainty is a significant risk to execution. 

Senator NELSON. So, from the perspective of the air traffic controllers, Mr. Rinaldi, how do you think the sequester has impacted 

air traffic safety? 

Mr. RINALDI. Thank you, Senator Nelson. I believe that the sequester cuts of last year, we have never seen that before where 

they actually sent controllers home to meet the mandated cuts, and 

everybody within the FAA, to meet the mandated cuts. 

It has impacted many lines of business. The fact that they had 

to close the FAA Academy and stop hiring new controllers on 

March 1, and the plan was to open on October 1, and because the 

full government shutdown, they were not able to open it and get 

it up and running until January 1. We were a full year behind of 

hiring new controllers, and we are seeing controllers retiring, you 

know, 25 years from when they are hired. 

The concern with us with sequester is if it was going to come 

back, the staffing levels in our facilities, they are at a record low, 

we need to get replenishment. We need to continue to train and get 

new qualified controllers on board. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you. Now, we are getting ready to do the 

FAA reauthorization next year. Mr. Hampton, beyond NextGen, 

what are priorities that you would like to see as we get ready for 

the reauthorization? 

Mr. HAMPTON. Thank you for the question. I think what Mr. 

Rinaldi said going forward is having what is the right number of 

controllers at the facilities. We have work underway at the critical 

facilities, having them properly staffed. 

In the past, they had large numbers of trainees, so adequately 

ensuring controller workforce. Another issue is having an adequate 

inspector model to make sure that we know we have the right 

number of inspectors. FAA has roughly 4,000 inspectors, and the 

key is how many we need and where do we place them. That is 

from the safety side. 

I also think going forward you are going to have to address the 

issues of UAS in the next bill and how quickly they can be integrated. 

Those are some of the thoughts for going forward in the next reauthorization. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Beck, do you agree? 

Mr. BECK. Yes, sir; I do. 

Senator NELSON. Do you want to add anything? 

Mr. BECK. No, just as the Co-Chair of the PBN NextGen Implementation Working Group, I do want to echo some of the comments 

that Mr. Whitaker and Mr. Rinaldi and also Mr. Hampton made. 

I see us making good, good progress with this NAC group, and 

I think we are going in the right direction, and we will be finishing 

up our report that will go to Congress in October. 

39 

We are going to have our milestones set, and we will mark our 

progress over the next one to 3 years of things we will be able to 

accomplish. 

I just wanted to add that for the record. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Senator Nelson. We appreciate 

you being here and the questions. 

I wanted to ask a question about savings from a fuel perspective, 

whether the En Route Automation system—obviously, more direct 

routes, and modifications to that; right? We have routes today. 

They could be more direct, so that automation will save some fuel. 

Then we have the Greener Skies, which is really more—I do not 

know what you call that, terminal based, you know, navigation. 

Which of those saves the most in fuel? Where are we going to get 

our most savings, from the terminal focus or the en route focus? 

Mr. WHITAKER. I think I may want to defer to Gary on that. We 

are doing a lot of work now in the NAC on trying to calculate fuel 

burn. It is one of the metrics that was asked for in the 2012 reauthorization, but that data was not available and has some proprietary issues associated with it. 

So, we have set up a structure to put in place ways to measure 

that fuel burn, but I think the most notable changes are coming 

in the approach, the Optimized Profile Descent and some of the 

more efficient routings coming into the terminal. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, the reason why I asked that question 

is because, listen, I believe that people are doing good work here 

and people are trying to implement a very complex system, but I 

think you heard from my colleague from Florida when you said 20 

years to implement, no one wants to hear that it takes 20 years 

to implement this. They want us to do the things we can bootstrap 

now and get implemented, obviously, in the most safe and secure 

manner, and build the system that way. 

Technology drives best in flat organizations, not hierarchical, so 

the more hierarchical we come with this, the longer it is going to 

take us to implement. The flatter we can do, the better. 

So, my point to Mr. Hampton about measurement, if the most 

savings that we are going to get is in the terminal based system, 

then helping to get those cities on line faster, what are the ways 

in which we can get every city in America thinking about, as Mr. 

Hampton and Mr. Rinaldi said, getting the procedural books in 

place. 

It does not mean they are going to change over without your OK, 

but it gets everybody in America focused on this now and focused 

on what this will bring to them, and gets them ready so when you 

can implement. 

You are learning great things from the Metroplexes in Seattle 

and Texas. You are learning a lot. You are going to flatten a lot 

of issues that are going to come up in other areas. 

But again, instead of having this more elongated time period 

while you are doing the En Route Automation system, you know, 

you are spending your money and time there, and yet here is 

where you can empower a lot of jurisdictions across the United 

States of America to get going now, and getting ready for where 

the most fuel savings are, and again, more efficient landing and 

40 

saving passengers time and everything, not that we do not have to 

have the big system. 

I do not know who wants to comment on that, Mr. Beck or Mr. 

Rinaldi. 

Mr. BECK. I certainly agree that the biggest bang for our buck 

as an operator is from cruise altitude to the end of the runway. I 

mean ideally, if we can make an arrival, an approach, and not 

touch those power levers once we bring it back to idle until we are 

on short final, that is where we are going to get the most bang for 

our bucks from fuel savings, emission, and noise, too. 

I would agree with you, Chairwoman. 

Senator CANTWELL. Mr. Rinaldi, how could we empower cities 

across America to start—even on an empowerment level—to start 

looking at this and getting ready for this implementation so we do 

not wait another ten years before we get major cities on this program? 

Mr. RINALDI. It is a great question. I think we have to actually 

focus on—Gary, Mr. Beck, is exactly correct. The optimal descent 

approach is where we are saving the fuel, saving the noise, and improving the carbon footprint on the environment. 

So, we have to start connecting the highways in the sky in the 

en route environment so we are not—when they are at flight level 

350, they are what we call ‘‘clean,’’ and they are green. They are 

flying with—they are burning fuel but there is not the stop and go 

when they get into the terminal environment. 

So, if we can start connecting Houston and North Texas and 

start moving up throughout the United States and connect the 

highways in the sky so that when they get into the terminal environment, they just have the optimal descent approach, that is 

where we are going to see the most benefit of NextGen, of PBN, 

Performance Based Navigation. 

So, how do we do that quickly? We have to set more teams in 

place and tell them to go forth and do this great work and start 

connecting the highways in the sky. 

The way to do that—we do have staffing issues within the FAA, 

but we have to start identifying some teams and start putting them 

in there so that we are building the system as we are going along, 

so when you leave Texas, you are not broken and all of a sudden 

we have to slow you down until you get to another major city. 

Senator CANTWELL. But is there not something right now that 

Houston could share with Miami or Chicago or Newark, that they 

can be thinking about and getting ready on their own, as opposed 

to waiting for somebody at the FAA to knock on their door? 

Mr. RINALDI. Absolutely; yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, I think that is what we need to look 

at. I do not know if you have any more questions, Senator Nelson. 

Yes, go ahead. 

Senator NELSON. Tell me about the technology, are we such that 

in the NextGen, we are going to do everything from satellites and 

not have radar, or are we going to have radar as back-up, in which 

case you have duplicate of costs? What is the story? 

Mr. WHITAKER. The idea is to transition to a satellite-based system, but given the nature of what we do, you need redundancies 

in the system, so there will be a redundancy radar system. It will 

41 

be a streamlined radar system from what we currently operate, but 

key to everything in aviation is redundancy, and there will be a redundant system in place. 

Senator NELSON. So, that being the case, would the redundancy 

be robust enough that if suddenly there were a major solar explosion and this electromagnetic pulse is suddenly coming to earth 

and it starts to fry these satellites, that redundancy is robust 

enough to still control the traffic? 

Mr. WHITAKER. Well, you may have exceeded my level of science 

knowledge, but if we have to shut down the satellite based system, 

it will be able to operate on the radar based system. 

Senator NELSON. It will? 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. 

Senator NELSON. That is the question. 

Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. 

Senator NELSON. So, how much do you lessen then the existing 

radars so that you still have the capability to operate? 

Mr. WHITAKER. So, the radar system now actually has 

redundancies to back it up, so we will be able to retire some of the 

other redundancies, if you will, but we will have a comprehensive 

plan that we will go through a typical safety analysis to make sure 

it is robust enough to handle all of the traffic, but will be more cost 

efficient than the one that we are running at this time. 

Senator NELSON. By the way, that is not the only traffic we are 

looking at. In our testing, for example, of our missiles, our defense 

missiles, the civilian space program, on our launches, the more that 

we can rely on satellites to help do the tracking, the greater efficiencies we can get, but we have the same kind of question, what 

is the redundancy. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Senator Nelson. Again, I want to 

thank the witnesses for their testimony and for their focus on this. 

I think you should take away from today’s hearing that while 

some progress has been made, we very much look forward to this 

July 1 report, which is mid-term, I guess, and we are going to get 

the final in October. 

We thank Mr. Hampton again for narrowing the focus, as he 

mentioned. I think that is what our larger questions are. Instead 

of having a broad approach, we want to see more focused things 

that are leveraged, if you will, no pun intended, but to change the 

approach a little bit here, and to use the private sector to focus the 

attention on those things that are going to be most leveraged. 

Again, if the most fuel efficiency is out of this approach issue, 

then what can we do to accelerate that during this time period 

while we are also getting the larger system replaced that is a cross 

navigation system. 

So, I think for all of us, we are stewards of the taxpayers’ dollars, 

so we want to see the implementation of this as cost-effectively as 

possible. 

We also want to see the investment made by the private sector, 

so all of that is a hand-in-hand process, and we certainly do not 

want to see government shutdowns and things of that nature inhibit us in this area. We want you to have clear ideas about what 

42 

you can count on, but we also, as I said, want it to be the more 

leveraged things that we can do right now. 

So, hopefully, you will take that feedback from us, as you report 

back to us on this in the future, and will take that into consideration. 

The good news out of Houston, out of Seattle, does provide some 

very, very promising results for the long-run, so we are certainly 

happy about that, and certainly, I am sure consumers will be 

happier when they have more on-time arrivals. 

Anyway, we will come back with a future hearing on this implementation. Members will have time now to submit questions to you 

all. We will have the record open for two weeks so members can 

ask individual questions. 

Senator CANTWELL. I am going to submit one on the UAV system. I do not have time right now to go into that. We will submit 

some questions for the record as well. 

But again, thank you very much for all that you are doing to 

help us get this new system implemented. 

We are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(43) 

A P P E N D I X 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO HON. MICHAEL G. WHITAKER

According to a June, 2014 series by the Washington Post, both civilian drones and 

the GPS signals used to navigate are vulnerable to hacking or jamming. These GPS 

signals important part of NextGen navigation systems for manned aircraft as well, 

though the danger may be more acute with drones as there is no pilot on-board to 

immediately identify directional changes. 

Dealing with this problem requires that we not only design secure systems upfront, but that we are able to immediately detect and respond to intrusions into our 

systems. I know you are working to build a secure system, but I also want to make 

sure we have the ability to detect attacks once all systems are operational. 

Question 1. What are you doing to ensure that when an attack occurs we will be 

able to respond quickly and effectively? 

Answer. The FAA follows a rigorous safety and risk management process to ensure that new systems and services introduced into the National Airspace System 

(NAS) are thoroughly evaluated and appropriate risk mitigations implemented to 

maintain and enhance the current level of safety. 

While there have been claims that the implementation of ADS–B in the NAS provides greater security or safety risks to air navigation systems in the United States, 

considering surveillance backup strategy, independent position validation, ADS–B 

infrastructure implementation, Air Traffic Control (ATC) procedures, and vulnerability studies for ADS–B, the FAA finds no basis to support that claim. 

Based on vulnerability assessments conducted for the FAA’s Automatic Dependent 

Surveillance-Broadcasting (ADS–B) services, the Agency determined that the risk to 

the National Airspace System (NAS) due to spoofing or intentional jamming would 

be no greater than the risk with the use of radar systems (Mode A, C, and S) employed to separate aircraft today. 

The FAA meets regularly with the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department 

of Homeland Security (DHS) representatives regarding the use of ADS–B information and national security issues to ensure that all NAS vulnerabilities are appropriately addressed. 

Question 2. GPS is clearly a critical capability for NextGen. What are you doing 

to ensure aviation safety in the event that GPS is jammed or suffers a malfunction? 

Answer. Multiple layers of redundancy and alternative systems ensure the safe 

operation of the NAS if there is a disruption to a part of the airspace system, such 

as the Global Positioning System (GPS). 

The NAS was designed to handle widespread, naturally-occurring, GPS disruptions from events such as solar storms, but the system has not experienced such 

disruptions on any noticeable scale. Conversely, manmade disruptions to GPS are 

likely to be very localized by their very nature, and such interference has had minimal effect. The FAA has traced the very few pilot reports of GPS issues to sources 

on the ground such as industrial processes. These events have not affected safety 

and the pilots reporting them automatically have utilized the available alternatives. 

GPS technology offers many advantages, but the FAA is not solely reliant on any 

single component of the NAS for safe operation. The future design and operation 

of the NAS will continue to utilize multiple layers of redundancy. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

HON. MICHAEL G. WHITAKER

Question 1. A recent Washington Post investigative report highlighted a disturbing number of incidents in which pilots reported dangerously close encounters 

with drones in the vicinity of airports, and incidents involving drones appear to be 

44 

on the rise. What steps is the FAA taking now to prevent more of these incidents 

from occurring around our airports? 

Answer. The FAA recently adopted a change to its Flight Standards Information 

Management System to assist flight safety inspectors in educating operators of 

UAS, including Model Aircraft, to comply with applicable Federal Aviation Regulations, including operations around airports. The FAA also recently published the Interpretation for the Special Rule for Model Aircraft on June 23, 2014, which, among 

other things, provides guidance to Model Aircraft operators regarding coordination 

with Air Traffic Control when operating near airports. The FAA is working with its 

inspectors to ensure they give standard information to the public on how to satisfy 

the requirements contained in the Federal Aviation Regulations and avoid endangering the safety of the Nation’s airspace. 

In addition, the FAA will be developing a public outreach campaign that includes 

further development of the relationship with industry, including the Academy of 

Model Aeronautics, a nationwide community-based model aircraft organization with 

a successful record of safe model aircraft operations. 

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 was clear that the FAA may also 

take enforcement action against UAS operators, including model aircraft operators, 

who operate their aircraft in a manner that endangers the safety of the national 

airspace system. In the interpretation of the provisions of the 2012 Act applicable 

to model aircraft, the FAA explains that this enforcement authority is designed to 

protect users of the airspace as well as people and property on the ground. 

Question 2. At the same time as the FAA is developing rules on the expanded use 

of unmanned aircraft, you are also working toward implementing the NextGen Air 

Traffic System. What steps are being taken in the development of NextGen to account for the presence of unmanned aircraft in the National Airspace System? 

Answer. NextGen has multiple ongoing initiatives to account for the presence of 

unmanned aircraft in the National Airspace System. 

NextGen, in coordination with other FAA lines of business, led the development 

of an end-state concept of operations for unmanned aircraft system integration into 

the NAS. This concept of operations is maturing to include the design of detailed 

operational scenarios which will inform safe and efficient integration of unmanned 

aircraft systems. 

NextGen is the steward for the National Airspace System Enterprise Architecture 

which establishes the foundation from which evolution of the NAS can be explicitly 

understood and modeled. NextGen, in collaboration with the FAA’s Unmanned Aircraft System Integration Office, has initiated an unmanned aircraft system National 

Airspace System Enterprise Architecture effort to deliver the first series of systems 

engineering diagrams that reflect the current, mid-term and future time frames of 

unmanned aircraft system National Airspace System integration. The initial diagrams capture the scenarios that are depicted in the FAA’s unmanned aircraft system concept of operations, both operationally and functionally. 

NextGen technologies are making it possible to safely introduce unmanned aircraft into the airspace system. Here are a few examples of the connection between 

NextGen and unmanned aircraft systems: 

• Airborne Collision Avoidance System for UAS: In order for many unmanned aircraft to operate safely in shared airspace, we must develop technologies that enable them to ‘‘detect and avoid’’ other airborne vehicles. The agency is researching and developing a collision avoidance system specifically designed for unmanned aircraft. It’s a technology called ACAS-Xu. 

• ADS–B: This technology helps achieve collision avoidance through more precise 

surveillance—and separation—of both manned and unmanned aircraft in the 

same vicinity. 

• National Airspace System Voice System: Another NextGen technology that will 

support unmanned aircraft is NAS Voice System. This system modernizes the 

voice communication capabilities that we use for air traffic services. It will enable controllers to communicate with the ground pilot of an unmanned vehicle. 

Question 3. What strategies can the FAA employ to expand the Metroplex initiative, or PBN procedure development generally, to drive near-term benefits at more 

airports nationwide? What resources are needed to achieve this expansion? 

Answer. The FAA has moved from a ‘‘quantity based’’ strategy to a ‘‘value-based’’ 

strategy for implementing new Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures. 

Currently, there are over 7,000 PBN procedures in the NAS. The agency goal is to 

not merely create more procedures but rather have procedures that add value for 

the customers. 

45 

This is a strategy that is endorsed by both industry, through the RTCA NextGen 

Advisory Committee (NAC), and labor. Drawing from the NAC recommendations on 

ways to improve PBN utilization, the FAA has implemented the Performance-Based 

Review, Revise or Remove (PRRRT) process to evaluate existing procedures. If utilization and value do not meet a cost-benefit ratio, the procedure is considered for 

revision to improve the value. If that not possible, the procedure is removed from 

the national inventory. This process is aimed at reducing the number of procedures 

controllers must maintain currency on, the number of procedures industry stakeholders must load/maintain in their navigation systems, and the number of procedures the FAA must maintain annually. 

Additionally, the FAA is drawing on recommendations from the NAC on how and 

where to deploy and/or expand the Metroplex initiatives. Current and future locations are evaluated against an agreed-up set of criteria that define areas where the 

greatest need exists and benefits can be derived. Evaluating and tracking benefits 

of these initiatives are currently part of the FAA–NAC work associated with the 

NextGen Implementation Working Group (NIWG). Recommendations are expected 

out of these efforts later this year. 

Question 4. In his testimony, Captain Beck of Alaska Airlines indicated that the 

FAA has not granted waivers for curved, GPS approaches to be considered ‘‘established’’ and eligible for the reduced separation between aircraft that creates efficiencies in the system. How long does it take to determine if a curved RNP approach 

can be ‘‘established’’ as on other, straight line approaches? Will you work to resolve 

this issue with Alaska Airlines? 

Answer. The FAA has and is currently working with Alaska Airlines, as well as 

a consortium of additional stakeholders including Horizon Air, Southwest Airlines, 

Delta Airlines, the SEA Airport Authority, the Boeing Company, local ATC, NATCA, 

and other industry players regarding the approval of Established on RNP (EoR) concept with specially designed instrument approach procedures into Seattle-Tacoma 

International Airport. 

The EoR concept is based on the utilization of aircraft navigation systems to 

achieve a specific level of positional accuracy and systems integrity to support a 

next generation type of reduced separation in the terminal airspace. These EoR approaches leverage the required navigational performance (RNP) found in modern 

aircraft avionics as a basis for relieving the standard separation standards currently 

mandated by FAA guidance between simultaneous approaches. 

Initial RNP EoR Approach designs were created in a highly collaborative environment of stakeholders through the use of various subject matter experts and standard Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedure development processes. An Environmental Assessment of the applicable geographic communities was conducted 

with flight trials and other analysis for the subject RNP EoR approaches and the 

findings were released to the public. The Boeing Company, in conjunction with FAA 

and Industry stakeholders, drafted a concept of operations document and performed 

a detailed safety analysis of the proposed EoR operation. The findings of both reports were utilized to validate the initial SEA EoR approach designs, and as a basis 

of the Safety Risk Management panel and subsequent documents that lead to the 

initial draft of the EoR operational Waiver request. 

The FAA’s Flight Standards division also conducted Human in The Loop Simulations (HITLS) of the EoR approach into SEA and recommended further considerations for maintaining the desired level of safety. These recommendations are currently being amended into an updated version of the SEA EoR waiver request to 

be vetted by stakeholders for concurrence and approval. 

In addition, final changes to the initial RNP EoR approach designs initiated by 

industry stakeholders, are scheduled to be published and available for use in November of 2014. As the FAA waiver approval process proceeds, operator and ATC 

readiness begins to ramp up with the necessary updates to system infrastructure 

and training required for successful implementation and utilization of EoR. The 

overarching EoR plan of execution was created in a highly collaborative environment with all stakeholders, including Alaska Airlines. This continued collaboration 

is progressing through regular meetings on a basis of no less than every two weeks 

working towards a goal of an ATC waiver approval and begin operational validation 

in the spring of 2015. 

Question 5. Performance Based Navigation procedures enable planes to fly more 

closely together and on more direct routes, which lead to fewer delays, shorter flight 

times, and reduced fuel consumption. Despite these potential benefits, airlines and 

industry stakeholders in the past have raised concerns about the use of Performance 

Based Navigation (PBN) procedures being developed. What steps is FAA taking to 

increase usage of existing procedures with respect to updating policies and proceVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
46 

dures, and providing training, tools and incentives for controllers to use these procedures whenever possible for properly equipped aircraft? 

Answer. While airlines and industry stakeholders may express concerns about the 

use of PBN procedures, they are actually used thousands of times each day. For example, in Atlanta the daily PBN procedure utilization rate during December 2013 

averaged more than 1,500 operations, which accounts for more than 68 percent of 

all IFR operations. Another example is Chicago. The utilization rate at Chicago Midway fluctuates based on runway use, but in June 2013, the RNP approach to runway 13C was used by 73 percent of the candidate aircraft. This procedure was designed specifically to de-conflict traffic from the adjacent Chicago O’Hare airport 

during certain weather conditions and runway configurations. In Seattle, of the 

seven STARs at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport only two are PBN procedures. 

However, more than 42 percent of all aircraft arriving in Seattle are already using 

these two new procedures. Usage of non-PBN procedures has been declining while 

use of PBN procedures is slowly increasing as pilots and controllers become for comfortable. 

The FAA has been working diligently to provide the guidance and tools controllers 

will need to increase utilization of PBN in the NAS. The FAA has recently implemented the PBN Implementation Process Order which provides the policy and guidance necessary for proper management, development, and maintenance of PBN procedures in the NAS. In the months leading up to the April 2014 implementation of 

the Climb/Descend Via phraseology, the FAA provided training to establish or reinforce more consistent use of efficient flight profiles. The FAA has been working to 

not only provide more training, but to also improve the standardized utilization of 

decision support tools that should facilitate increased utilization of PBN procedures 

in the NAS. 

Currently, one of the largest barriers to the consistent utilization of PBN procedures is the mixed equipage of aircraft using the National Airspace System (NAS). 

Mixed equipage refers to the capabilities of individual aircraft in the NAS—meaning 

certain aircraft are not equipped to leverage the PBN infrastructure that is in place, 

while others are equipped for full utilization. To address the need to manage the 

myriad aircraft configurations operating in the NAS, the FAA is revamping adaptation and training for the existing Time-based Flow Management (TBFM) system and 

working to implement the Terminal Spacing and Sequencing (TSS) tool. By creating 

a national training course to standardize the utilization of TBFM, increase utilization of TBFM, and implement TSS; the FAA expects to enable higher utilization of 

RNP procedures at high volume airports. 

Question 6. In the 1990s the FAA’s Advanced Automation System procurement 

failed, at a cost of over $5 billion, with relatively little to show for that investment. 

As we approach that $5.9 billion investment in NextGen, how are you avoiding the 

problems that derailed that program in the 90s? 

Answer. Lessons learned from major program failure led to sweeping changes in 

the FAA’s acquisition management process. Most recently, in 2011, the FAA established the Program Management Organization (PMO) to manage NAS system acquisitions and ensure stronger discipline in managing the dependencies among the 

major programs. 

The PMO structure ensures greater visibility, tighter alignment and closer integration of complex, interdependent NextGen initiatives and innovative technology. 

The PMO plays a critical role in the success of NextGen by acting as the bridge between strategic requirements and tactical program implementation to improve the 

safety and efficiency of the NAS. 

The PMO has instituted bi-weekly reviews of its major acquisitions and activities, 

with a specific focus on risks, issues and opportunities related to system interdependencies. These reviews, with participation from executives at the director level 

and above across NextGen, Finance, and ATO operations, have proven extremely 

valuable to executive stakeholders charged with overseeing the success of NextGen. 

We have utilized lessons learned from troubled programs (for example, En Route 

Automation Modernization or ERAM) to improve how programs are structured and 

how systems are implemented. These areas include program governance; communications improvements; testing processes; requirements management; risk management; and maintenance transition planning. These lessons learned and process improvements will inform a program throughout its lifecycle. 

Lastly, recognizing the importance of obtaining input from users of the system 

early in the pre-implementation phase of programs is critical. The scope of controller 

and maintenance technician involvement covers a range of activities including: development of operational concepts, human in the loop simulations, and evaluation 

of operational prototypes. This helps to reduce risk prior to full deployment of a sysVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:59 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95362.TXT JACKIE
47 

tem, by providing early user involvement as we mature operational capabilities and 

assess operational suitability of systems. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

HON. MICHAEL G. WHITAKER

Question. For decades the FAA Airports Division has addressed residents’ concerns about airport compliance with environmental regulations using a framework 

that provides for collaboration and the consideration of stakeholder concerns. However, recent experiences at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International (MSP) Airport 

during the proposed plan for RNAV implementation suggest there is some misalignment between local expectations of the process for new projects and the FAA’s processes for addressing community concerns. 

Mr. Whitaker, can you talk about the FAA’s role when it comes to public outreach 

and the way the FAA involves stakeholders including operators and communities? 

How does the agency intend to address public concerns moving forward in a manner 

considerate of precedent and local expectations surrounding the design and environmental review of NextGen aircraft procedures? Will you commit to working with the 

communities surrounding airports, such as the Twin Cities metro area? 

Answer. The FAA conducts public outreach and coordination with stakeholders for 

airspace actions, in strict accordance with agency directives and procedures. Any 

airspace actions that are not categorically excluded from requiring an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) per the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) typically involves conducting public workshops, 

and soliciting public comments on draft EA and EIS documents. Associated public 

outreach activities includes publishing notices in newspapers, direct solicitation for 

comments from impacted stakeholders, and presenting briefings to stakeholder organizations. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

GARY BECK

Question. Low usage of Performance Based Navigation procedures may also be related to whether a given procedure provides real benefits to airlines. In your experience does the FAA development of new PBN procedures properly and proactively 

identify, develop, and implement the most useful new routes? 

Answer. Over the past ten years, the FAA has had a process for developing Area 

Navigation (RNAV) Arrivals that included industry involvement. While progress 

was made at some airports, the procedures often failed when it came time for implementation. This has been due to a variety of reasons ranging from aircraft technology, pilot and controller situational bias, airspace boundary constraints, and 

length of time from initial design to publication. 

Initially, FAA’s Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approaches were developed and published with a focus on quantity, not quality. Many are simply an overlay of an existing conventional approach procedure, without providing safety, access, 

or operational efficiency enhancements. RNP approaches must be requested by the 

pilot; as such, crews are reluctant to request them and controllers are reluctant to 

issue them. Therefore, many RNP approaches have been published, but very few 

have been implemented and used. 

With initiatives in the National Airspace System like Metroplex, Greener Skies, 

and Portland, Oregon, PBN implementation, the process has become more streamlined and inclusive. We are seeing a collaborative effort that includes a broader 

group of key stakeholders including FAA, Labor, Airports, Community, and Industry. Having many diverse viewpoints working toward the same goal of improving 

airspace safety and efficiency is proving to be a success. Low usage should be a 

thing of the past especially with regard to Standard Arrivals because most of the 

industry is equipped and trained. RNP usage should increase as equipage and training increase. 

There are still challenges in this effort, but Alaska Airlines believes the FAA is 

on the right track. The new PBN Order that was published earlier this year, as well 

as the RTCA PBN Blueprint Task Group’s efforts, will bring even more clarity to 

the process and ensure that airspace changes have a measurable benefit. Building 

on a process that began July 2013 at the request of the FAA, the Industry and FAA 

have come together to form the NextGen Integration Working Group (NTWG) under 

the NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC). With over one hundred representatives 

from all sectors of aviation, the group has been conducting deep dives of four focus 

areas to identify what it takes to deploy meaningful capabilities at specific sites. 

48 

The NTWG most recently met in July 2014 to receive reports on the progress 

being made with the four teams: Performance Based Navigation (PBN), Surface and 

Data Sharing, Closely Spaced Parallel Runways and DataComm-enabled ControllerPilot DataLink Communications (CPDLC) and pre-departure clearances. The goal of 

the NTWG is to provide the NAC with an integrated implementation plan and recommendations for tangible benefits at the October 8, 2014, NAC meeting. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

GARY BECK

Question. For decades the FAA Airports Division has addressed residents’ concerns about airport compliance with environmental regulations using a framework 

that provides for collaboration and the consideration of stakeholder concerns. However, recent experiences at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International (MSP) Airport 

during the proposed plan for RNAV implementation suggest there is some misalignment between local expectations of the process for new projects and the FAA’s processes for addressing community concerns. 

Mr. Beck, you dealt with this issue in Seattle. How important is community outreach to the success of deploying NextGen in a way that works for the community? 

Answer. Community engagement through close partnerships with the airport authority is critical to successfully implementing airspace changes. The Port of Seattle, 

operator of Sea-Tac Airport, was a key partner in the Greener Skies project. Due 

to the relationships the Port already had with local communities, they were able to 

start engaging local leaders early in the project with the facts about what was 

planned and what we expected the benefits to be. 

The Port shared existing noise abatement corridors and local noise concerns with 

the rest of the project team, ensuring new procedure designs remained within the 

pre-defined corridors. Even when flight paths over the ground didn’t change, media 

coverage of Greener Skies resulted in a perception from some neighborhoods that 

there had been a change. The Environmental Assessment process was thorough, 

providing detailed information about the project impacts to the public. Being transparent with the data was helpful. Community meetings at local schools and city 

halls allowed citizens and local elected officials to learn about the project and share 

their perspective. 

Æ 

49 

This page intentionally left blank. 

50 

This page intentionally left blank. 

51 

This page intentionally left blank.