Office of Inspector General

Audit Report

CHALLENGES WITH IMPLEMENTING 

NEAR-TERM NEXTGEN CAPABILITIES AT 

CONGESTED AIRPORTS COULD DELAY 

BENEFITS

Federal Aviation Administration

Report Number: AV-2012-167

Date Issued: August 1, 2012
U.S. Department of

Memorandum

Transportation

Office of the Secretary

of Transportation

Office of Inspector General

Subject: ACTION: Challenges With Implementing NearTerm NextGen Capabilities at Congested Airports

Could Delay Benefits

Report No. AV-2012-167

Federal Aviation Administration

Date: August 1, 2012

From: Jeffrey B. Guzzetti

Assistant Inspector General

for Aviation and Special Program Audits

Reply to 

Attn. of: JA-10

To: Acting Federal Aviation Administrator

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that there are about 

7,000 aircraft in the air over the United States at any given time. To better 

manage this traffic and meet future air travel demands, FAA is developing the 

Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), a satellite-based air 

traffic control system intended to replace the current ground-based system. 

NextGen involves a significant overhaul of the National Airspace System (NAS) 

that will require multibillion-dollar investments from both Government and 

airspace users. 

In September 2009, an RTCA1 task force of government-industry 

representatives—established at FAA’s request—made 32 recommendations for 

accelerating NextGen’s deployment2

The Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure and its Subcommittee on Aviation asked us to review FAA’s 

actions to address the task force’s recommendations. Accordingly, our audit 

(see exhibit A). These recommendations 

were intended to quickly generate airspace user benefits, support cross-cutting 

improvements to air traffic management and communications, and encourage 

operator investment and confidence in FAA’s ability to implement new 

capabilities.

 1 Organized in 1935 as the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, RTCA, Inc., is a private, not-for-profit 

corporation that develops consensus-based recommendations regarding communications, navigation, surveillance, 

and air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system issues. It functions as a Federal Advisory Committee. 2 RTCA, “NextGen Mid-Term Implementation Task Force Report,” September 9, 2009.
2

objectives were to assess the extent to which FAA is (1) responding to the 

recommendations, including adjusting its budgets and establishing mechanisms 

for continued industry collaboration, and (2) addressing barriers that may hinder 

its ability to successfully implement the recommendations.

As agreed with the requesters, we assessed FAA’s overall response to the task 

force recommendations, but focused specifically on FAA’s efforts to implement 

an initiative known as “metroplex,” which aims to improve the efficiency of 

airspace that affects multiple airports near large metropolitan areas. One of the 

most critical task force recommendations called for FAA to expedite its efforts to 

relieve congestion and delays at major metropolitan area airports by using expert 

teams that focus on implementing quality improvements at each location. FAA 

launched the metroplex initiative to expedite the delivery of high value 

performance-based navigation (PBN) procedures and associated airspace 

changes.

On December 21, 2010, we issued an interim report on the status of FAA’s 

response to RTCA’s recommendations.3

We conducted this audit in accordance with generally accepted Government 

auditing standards prescribed by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Exhibit B details our scope and methodology. Exhibit C lists the specific 

locations visited or contacted.

At that time, we reported that FAA was 

incorporating the RTCA’s recommendations in its NextGen plans but had not 

specified how it would execute key initiatives for addressing delays in major 

metropolitan areas. 

RESULTS IN BRIEF

While FAA quickly incorporated the task force’s recommendations into its 

NextGen strategic plans and budgets and established a mechanism for continued 

industry collaboration, its efforts are delayed in key areas such as metroplex, 

airport surface operations, and data communications. While FAA has focused on 

one of the most critical recommendations—metroplex airspace—it missed 

milestones at the first two sites due to unresolved staffing issues and lack of a 

project plan. The expected completion date for all metroplex sites is now 

15 months later than FAA’s earlier, more aggressive plans. Further, industry 

representatives are concerned that the effort may not deliver all planned/desired 

benefits since FAA has focused only on near-term airspace and procedure 

improvements rather than maximizing new technologies and advanced procedures 

 3 OIG Controlled Correspondence CC-2011-001, Letter to Chairmen Oberstar and Costello and Ranking Members 

Mica and Petri Regarding FAA's Efforts To Implement RTCA Task Force Recommendations for NextGen, 

December 21, 2010. OIG reports are available on our Web site at http://www.oig.dot.gov. 
3

as recommended by the task force. For example, of the 136 metroplex solutions 

proposed for the first 7 metroplex sites, only 3 are for the more advanced 

procedures that allow aircraft to fly more precise routes and curved approaches to 

airports. Additionally, FAA has not yet integrated efforts from other related 

initiatives, such as better managing surface operations, into its metroplex 

initiative. As a result of continued delays, uncertain benefits, and ineffective 

communication on key metroplex initiatives, airspace users are skeptical about 

FAA’s ability to implement the task force recommendations and remain reluctant 

to equip with new avionics.

FAA has not yet resolved many of the barriers that will impede the 

implementation of the task force recommendations. These barriers include 

working across diverse agency lines of businesses, updating policies, streamlining 

the process for implementing new flight procedures, applying environmental 

regulations, upgrading controller automation tools, and training controllers on 

new advanced procedures. While FAA has plans to address these barriers, 

progress has been slow, and none of its initiatives have been fully implemented. 

For example, in September 2010, FAA completed a study4

We are making recommendations to improve FAA’s ability to effectively 

implement the task force recommendations in a timely manner while maintaining

industry coordination and support. 

that identified

21 recommendations for streamlining the process for developing and deploying 

new flight procedures; however, FAA has yet to implement the majority of the 

recommendations and estimates it may take as long as 5 years to implement all of 

them. Removing the barriers to fully implementing the metroplex initiative will 

be difficult because FAA does not have a process to effectively track, resolve, 

and mitigate specific barriers (e.g., procedures and training) identified at each 

metroplex site. As a result, FAA’s metroplex effort and implementation of other 

recommendations will likely face delays, and benefits may not be realized within 

recommended timeframes. 

BACKGROUND 

In January 2009, FAA asked RTCA to reach a consensus on the NextGen 

operational improvements planned for the 2012–2018 timeframe. In September 

2009, the RTCA task force delivered its final report to FAA, which identified the 

following overarching issues for advancing NextGen:

• Users are willing to support FAA communications, navigation, and 

surveillance infrastructure programs that require user investments only if 

 4 FAA’s Navigation Procedures (NAV Lean) Instrument Flight Procedures Final Report, September 2010.
4

those programs provide a clear path to immediate and tangible benefits to the 

users.

• Focusing on delivering near-term operational benefits, rather than on the 

entire infrastructure, would help gain operator confidence in FAA plans and 

encourage users to invest in NextGen. A key element for this is to obtain 

industry and FAA agreement on common metrics to measure benefits. 

• Assigning responsibility, accountability, authority, and funding within the 

Agency is critical to accomplish all required non-infrastructure tasks (i.e., 

development of procedures and policy) and to achieve NextGen benefits.

The task force made 32 recommendations mainly in 5 primary areas—surface, 

runway access, metroplex, high-altitude cruise, and access to the NAS—calling 

for FAA to take advantage of existing technologies and onboard aircraft 

equipment that can quickly generate benefits. 

DELAYS IN ADDRESSING KEY TASK FORCE 

RECOMMENDATIONS ARE DISCOURAGING INDUSTRY 

INVESTMENT IN NEXTGEN 

While FAA quickly endorsed the task force’s recommendations by incorporating 

them into its NextGen strategic plans and budgets and establishing a mechanism 

for continued industry collaboration, it has made limited progress in 

implementing them. FAA’s efforts have been delayed in key areas, such as airport 

surface operations, metroplex, and data communications. Additionally, 

unresolved issues with the metroplex initiative could slow its deployment, 

increase costs, and delay the delivery of much needed benefits at congested 

airports. As a result, industry representatives have expressed concerns over 

FAA’s delayed execution of the task force recommendations and the Agency’s

ineffective communication on projects—which may ultimately make users

reluctant to invest in NextGen equipage and advance NextGen at key locations. 

FAA Is Responding to Task Force Recommendations but Has Made 

Only Limited Progress in Areas Critical for Improving the 

Performance of the NAS

Within 4 months of the RTCA report, FAA issued a plan to implement all task 

force recommendations and incorporated its response in the NextGen 

Implementation Plans5

 5 FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan is an annual plan that sets out FAA’s vision for NextGen, now and into the 

midterm. The plan further identifies the goals FAA has set for technology and program deployment and the 

commitments FAA has made in support of that vision. 

as recommended by the task force. In addition, FAA 

allocated over $600 million in funding for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 to fund task 
5

force-related activities. Further, FAA established the NextGen Advisory 

Committee (NAC)6

• Metroplex Airspace (Improve airspace affecting multiple airports near 

large metropolitan areas)—FAA has focused most of its efforts on 

metroplex. Specifically, FAA has identified 21 metroplex sites,

in September 2010 to address the task force’s 

recommendation for providing a mechanism for continued industry collaboration. 

However, while FAA has begun work to address all of the recommendations, 

FAA’s efforts in critical areas, such as the metroplex, airport surface operations, 

and data communications have been delayed. For other recommendation areas, 

such as runway access and high altitude cruise, FAA is not planning according to 

the timelines and locations recommended by the task force. 

7 developed a 

method to prioritize them, and completed 7 studies to propose potential 

solutions involving airspace and procedures in each metroplex.

8

• Airport Surface Operations (Improve management of airport taxiways, 

gates, and parking areas)—While FAA has various airport surface initiatives 

underway, the Agency has yet to integrate these initiatives with its metroplex 

plans as envisioned by the task force. In March 2011, FAA designated an 

office director with responsibility for implementing surface initiatives—

18 months after the task force recommended it. This is a high priority for the 

taskforce, yet it took FAA a considerable amount of time to appoint an agency 

employee to lead and manage this effort. Ongoing surface management 

projects span multiple air traffic organizations without a coordinated plan.

However, 

problems with selecting FAA managers to fill project lead positions and 

developing a project plan delayed the design and implementation phases for 

the first two sites. The expected completion date for all metroplex sites is 15

months later than earlier, more aggressive plans.

• Runway Access (Improve the use of converging or closely spaced runways 

during low visibility conditions)—Runway studies are ongoing. FAA adopted 

the task force dates and locations for closely spaced parallel operations 

projects but has not defined locations and dates for implementing key 

recommendations (e.g., a precision surveillance system for runways and a new 

automated tool to maximize benefits of routes).

 6 The NAC is a Federal advisory committee that will develop recommendations for NextGen priorities 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. 7 Washington, DC; North Texas (Dallas); Charlotte; Atlanta; Northern California; Houston; Southern California; 

New York/Philadelphia; Chicago; Seattle; Las Vegas Valley; South Florida; Boston; Denver; Orlando; Detroit; 

Memphis; Phoenix; Minneapolis-St. Paul; Cleveland; Tampa. 8 Subsequently, FAA reduced the number of metroplex projects from 21 to 13 by combining some and dropping 

others because of other ongoing airspace and PBN initiatives. The sites dropped were: New York/Philadelphia, 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Seattle, and Las Vegas Valley.
6

• High-Altitude Cruise (Improve high-altitude flight by better using available 

airspace to increase capacity and reduce delays)—The task force wanted 

FAA to take action in 2011 to expand the use of an existing high-altitude 

automated controller tool for managing aircraft. Instead, FAA focused its

actions on implementing a longer-term solution called Time-Based Flow 

Management.

9

• Data Communications (DataComm) (Enable more efficient use of 

available or forecast capacity)—Due to delays in modernizing related 

automation that controllers use to manage high-altitude air traffic, FAA’s 

timeline for developing this capability slipped by 2 years, from 2016 to 2018.

Industry representatives stated that they need assurance that the revised

implementation date for high altitude is attainable. They view DataComm as 

the key “building block” needed to shift from clearance-based air traffic 

control to NextGen’s concept of more precisely managing aircraft from 

departure to arrival with the benefits of reduced fuel consumption, lower 

operating costs, and reduced emissions.

FAA’s target date for this system is not until November 2014, 

which is about 3 years beyond the timeframe recommended by the task force.

While FAA has completed portions of its action plan in response to the task force 

recommendations, task force representatives remain concerned with FAA’s

overall timelines for these projects. For example, the task force stated that if some 

DataComm capabilities are delayed to 2018, as FAA has currently proposed, 

airspace users will need to revisit their business cases and commitment to 

advance NextGen. Meeting implementation dates is critical to closing a business 

case for operator investment. Task force industry representatives emphasize the 

need for FAA to shift from planning to implementation. 

The task force also expected that FAA would adopt an approach that integrates 

key recommendations at critical metroplex sites. For example, in its 2009 report, 

the task force recommended surface and runway access improvements

specifically for the Atlanta metroplex. However, FAA limited its metroplex 

initiative to only airspace and procedures that can be implemented without any 

additional aircraft equipage or improvements to the automation system controllers 

used to manage traffic.10

 9 Time Based Flow Management enhances system efficiency and improves the traffic flow by leveraging the 

capabilities of controller decision support tools designed to optimize the flow of aircraft into capacity constrained 

areas. 

In the early stages of FAA’s metroplex initiative, task 

force leaders encouraged FAA to adopt a more integrated approach by including 

surface and runway access improvements in its metroplex effort. In October 

10 FAA officials told us that the Agency did not commit to an approach that integrates other capabilities in the nearterm.
7

2010, over 1 year after the task force report, FAA tasked the NAC to develop 

recommendations on how FAA can better integrate its efforts.11

FAA Has Efforts Underway To Implement its Metroplex Initiative, but 

Delays Have Occurred

The task force and FAA identified the metroplex initiative as a key area that 

could provide the most near-term benefits by improving the flow of traffic and 

reducing delays at congested airports in 21 major metropolitan areas. Work at 

each of these 21 sites will consist of study and design phases that will take about 

3 years (see figure 1). FAA first uses study teams12 to provide a strategic look at 

each metroplex site and then uses design and implementation teams13

Specifically, FAA has completed initial studies at 7 of the 21 locations and has 

begun design work at 6 of these locations.

to 

accomplish its metroplex work. FAA planned the metroplex initiative as a 5 to

7-year effort, but there are unresolved issues with some sites that could slow its 

deployment, increase costs, and delay benefits.

14 Although FAA’s early plans were to 

complete work at all metroplex sites by June 2016, the Agency shifted the end 

date by 15 months to September 2017 because it determined the initial schedule

was too aggressive. FAA does not consider this a delay because the Agency still 

expects to finish implementation within the overall 5 to 7-year timeframe 

estimated for the metroplex initiative. However, in addition to a later completion 

date, FAA has also reduced the number of metroplex sites. For example, a critical

site with system-wide impacts, such as New York, is not included in FAA’s 

current metroplex effort due to an ongoing legacy airspace and procedures 

project. Further, this schedule does not reflect adjustments FAA will have to 

make once it adopts a more integrated metroplex approach, as recommended by 

the task force.

 11 A NAC subcommittee is continuing its effort to reprioritize metroplex sites and make recommendations for 

integrating other capabilities. 12 Study teams are the first step in the metroplex process to provide a front-end strategic look at each major metroplex. 

These teams analyze the operational challenges, assess current/planed airspace and procedures efforts, explore new 

solution opportunities, and issue a study report with recommended procedure and airspace solutions. 13 Design and implementation teams are responsible for executing the design, evaluation, and implementation portions 

at each metroplex site. 14 The seven locations are Washington, DC; North Texas (Dallas); Charlotte; Northern California; Houston, Atlanta, 

and Southern California. Design work has begun at Washington, DC; North Texas; Charlotte; Houston; and 

Atlanta.
8

Figure 1. Notional Timeline for Each Metroplex Site

Source: FAA

At the first two metroplex locations (Washington, DC and North Texas), delays 

of 4 to 5 months from the scheduled start date of design and implementation

occurred due to FAA’s difficulty in establishing a project level agreement 

(PLA)15

FAA is also challenged with managing and prioritizing the competing demands to 

develop new flight procedures for metroplex and non-metroplex airports. FAA 

estimates that in FY 2012 and beyond, 60 to 70 percent of its flight procedure 

and assigning staff. FAA did not complete the metroplex PLA until June 

2011, 4 months after the scheduled start date for the first design and 

implementation team. Further, after the study teams completed their work at the 

first two sites, it took FAA up to 6 months to identify FAA project leads to 

oversee the design and implementation work. Part of this delay was due to

reluctance by air traffic facility managers to release selected candidates because 

they could not backfill those positions. FAA and industry representatives have 

expressed concern that staffing large teams on a continuous, rotational basis for 

the next 5 to 7 years will be a significant challenge because there is a lack of 

critical expertise in both FAA and industry and the Agency has not successfully 

implemented these types of projects in the past. Some industry representatives 

suggested that the current process could possibly be streamlined by combining 

study and design team efforts to accelerate the timeline.

 15 FAA uses project level agreements to define and document the work agreement and responsibilities between 

different offices within FAA and to provide milestones, deliverables, and spending plans.
9

development work will be at the metroplex locations. However, at the same time, 

FAA will continue to be involved in developing and implementing flight 

procedures for other non-metroplex airports. FAA officials told us that the 

Agency plans to prioritize its metroplex work to ensure that both types of projects 

will be completed as planned. However, this will be challenging given the 

complex and large-scale nature of the metroplex initiative and the fact that FAA 

does not have an effective system for prioritizing the development and 

implementation of new instrument flight procedures.

Airspace Users Are Concerned That FAA’s Current Metroplex 

Initiative Will Not Maximize Operational Benefits

FAA’s current metroplex effort is limited to airspace and procedure 

improvements and does not take advantage of new technologies and more 

advanced procedures as envisioned by the task force. As a result, airline 

representatives are concerned that FAA has not yet clearly defined expected

benefits for proposed metroplex activities and that maximum benefits—shorter 

flight paths and fuel savings—may not be achievable. This is important to the

airlines who are key stakeholders in the metroplex initiative. According to the 

RTCA task force report, airline representatives stated they will only support 

FAA’s metroplex initiative if it provides a clear path to immediate and tangible 

benefits. Our review found three primary areas of concerns, described below.

FAA’s Metroplex Plans Have Not Kept Pace With Airlines Already 

Equipped for Advanced RNP Procedures 

FAA’s metroplex initiative focuses primarily on adding high-value Area 

Navigation (RNAV) procedures16 and optimizing descent and climb profiles.

While these procedures offer some benefits, industry representatives who have 

aircraft equipped with advanced avionics are concerned that FAA’s plans are not 

taking advantage of more advanced Required Navigation Performance (RNP) 

procedures.

17

 16 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. 

Three of the seven metroplex study teams suggested that the design 

and implementation teams explore RNP procedures but did not include them as 

part of their final recommendations. While the RTCA task force recommended 

that FAA optimize RNAV procedures everywhere and use RNP where beneficial, 

the first 7 study teams proposed only 3 of the 136 possible solutions (2 percent) 

for RNP procedures. For those airlines that are equipped with RNP, this creates 

the risk that the procedures recommended by FAA will be obsolete and not used 

by airlines because they do not allow for more precise and curved approaches.

17 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. 
10

Airline representatives want FAA to focus its efforts on developing new flight 

paths that provide for more precise and curved approaches, rather than the 

Agency’s past practice of mostly designing RNAV and RNP procedures that

overlay existing flight paths. In past years, FAA officials viewed this approach as 

a necessary step in training pilots and controllers on using the technology. In 

addition, FAA designed procedures to accommodate the performance capability 

of the least capable RNAV/RNP equipped aircraft to include as many operators as 

possible. FAA officials assert that because more aircraft are equipped for and 

qualified to use RNAV, it is more prudent to deploy RNAV procedures, 

particularly when air traffic controllers are faced with challenges that involve 

sequencing equipped and non-equipped aircraft at busy airports. While this 

approach may seem logical from an industry-wide perspective, it does not 

accommodate the nearly half of all active commercial aircraft that are equipped to 

fly RNP procedures with curved approaches. Representatives from air carriers 

who are equipped stated that FAA’s approach offers little operational and 

financial benefits to airlines. According to those representatives, the approach 

using RNAV is based on decades-old technology, and their carriers can conduct 

more efficient turns and fly shorter approaches using RNP.

Industry objections to FAA’s focus on RNAV rather than RNP procedures are 

particularly well illustrated at the North Texas Metroplex, which includes the two 

major Dallas airports—Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport and Dallas Love 

Field. A large percentage of major air carrier aircraft that operate at the Dallas 

airports have operational approval to conduct advanced RNP operations—over 

80 percent at Love Field. Yet, FAA has not developed any RNP procedures for

Love Field; hence, airlines cannot perform RNP operations. Additionally, the 

metroplex study team only recommended one RNP procedure at this airport due 

to the team’s primary focus on deploying RNAV procedures, lack of experience 

with RNP, and desire to avoid extensive environmental studies.

Limitations in FAA’s current metroplex effort may prove problematic at other 

sites as well, given the large percentage of commercial aircraft equipped with 

RNP. In keeping with the original task force’s findings, a NAC work group also 

found that confidence in the benefits and timing of FAA initiatives is critical for 

operators to commit to invest in more advanced equipment.

18

 18 A Report of the NextGen Advisory Committee in Response to Tasking from the Federal Aviation Administration, 

NextGen Equipage: User Business Case Gaps, September 2011.

As a result, the

work group recommended that FAA develop policies, procedures, and related 

improvements for controllers to allow currently equipped aircraft to routinely use 

RNP. These actions may also encourage additional carriers to equip with RNP. 

Airline representatives also want FAA to move toward implementing new 
11

procedures that deconflict air traffic19

FAA has taken recent action to better enable PBN procedures as part of its

transition to NextGen. In December 2011, FAA published a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking seeking comments on its proposed strategy to transition from the 

legacy navigational aids to one that enables a performance-based system as part

of NextGen. FAA is also exploring ways to decommission its legacy navigation

systems to support RNAV and RNP capabilities using Global Positioning System 

navigation. 

between adjacent airports. FAA has already

implemented these procedures at Chicago O’Hare and Midway airports. Similar 

actions could measurably increase the capacity of other airports within the 

metroplex.

Firm Estimates of Benefits Have Yet To Be Determined 

While FAA expects the metroplex initiative to generate fuel savings, and reduce 

track distances and carbon emissions, it has yet to clearly define these benefits 

due to a lack of actual operational data. For example, benefits estimated by the 

study team for all airlines flying into the Washington, DC, metroplex ranged 

widely from a low of $6 million savings per year to a high of $19 million. 

Similarly, for the Dallas, TX, study, annual estimates ranged from a low of 

$10.3 million to a high of $21.7 million per year for all airlines flying into the 

North Texas airports. Industry representatives stated that benefits are difficult to 

predict and can only be accurately measured once the lead carrier(s) fly the 

procedures in their flight simulators during the design and implementation phase, 

which has only recently begun. Without a clearer picture of the potential return on 

their investment, airlines are likely to delay making business and operational 

decisions.

FAA Does Not Have a Clear Process That Ensures All Projects Are 

Properly Reviewed and Prioritized

FAA officials told us that if study teams identify a procedure within a metroplex 

project that demonstrates significant benefits but is deemed outside the 

timeframes established for metroplex, it will be removed from the metroplex 

program and managed separately. FAA recently established a process for study 

teams to formally submit issues that are identified outside the scope of the current 

metroplex initiative to appropriate offices within FAA. However, it is not clear 

how FAA will prioritize these projects among the Agency’s other flight 

procedure work and how the metroplex program plans to track the status of those

projects. This could lead to delays in implementing these more efficient flight 

 19 Deconflicting air traffic is separating aircraft arrivals and departures for two or more adjacent airports to improve 

throughput and access.
12

procedures and increases the uncertainty as to whether these beneficial 

procedures will ever be implemented. 

FAA’s Communication and Collaboration With Local Airline and Air

Traffic Management Officials Has Been Limited

FAA has established an overall mechanism through the NAC to ensure continued 

industry collaboration in implementing the RTCA recommendations, including 

the metroplex effort. However, we identified shortcomings in communication at 

the regional and local FAA levels as well as with industry. For example, FAA did 

not communicate information concerning the delays of the design and 

implementation teams to local facilities, and none of the officials we spoke with

at these facilities were aware of the timing for the next phase. Therefore, many 

FAA and industry representatives question whether FAA has the ability to carry 

out its agenda for metroplex. 

Airlines that conduct the majority of operations at the Dallas locations and would 

stand to benefit the most from improvements voiced concerns about the extent of 

FAA’s collaborative efforts. While industry officials are on the NAC and the 

metroplex study teams, some key airline representatives we interviewed said they 

did not agree with the proposed solutions from the study teams. For example, an 

airline representative from one of the major airlines stated that there were 

deficiencies in the study team’s notional designs for the Dallas Fort Worth

International Airport and Dallas Love Field. For instance, the proposed 

procedures contained numerous incremental changes in altitude rather than a 

continuous descent, which reduced the benefits to the airline. According to this 

representative, the new procedures preferred by the airline conflicted with FAA’s 

more limited implementation approach or resulted in extensive environmental 

reviews, which are not yet included in FAA’s metroplex initiative.

FAA HAS NOT FULLY ADDRESSED KEY BARRIERS TO 

IMPLEMENTING TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

FAA faces organizational, policy, and training barriers that could undermine its 

efforts to implement the RTCA task force recommendations and delay expected 

benefits. These barriers include working effectively across diverse agency lines of 

business, making policy changes, developing new flight procedures, ensuring 

controllers are adequately trained on new procedures, and developing new 

automation tools to allow controllers to effectively manage traffic. These barriers

vary with each metroplex location, with some more critical at certain sites. 

Without a consistent, documented process to track and resolve these barriers and 

mitigate risk at each site, further delays may occur. We also found that FAA’s 

corrective action plans to improve policies and procedures could take years to 

implement. FAA recognizes that fundamental changes are needed in how it 
13

manages near-term NextGen initiatives and has efforts underway that should help 

address these barriers.

FAA Lacks a Coordinated and Integrated Approach To Effectively

Manage NextGen

To complete RTCA recommendations, FAA will have to work across diverse 

agency lines of business—including its Aircraft Certification Service, Flight 

Standards Service, and Air Traffic Organization (ATO)—which it has not done 

effectively in the past. For example, as we testified in July 2009, organizational 

barriers and fragmented efforts hindered FAA’s process to approve new flight 

procedures.20

Although FAA’s Flight Standards Service is responsible for approving new 

procedures, representatives from Flight Standards are not yet a required part of 

the metroplex teams, and it is unclear what Flight Standards’ role will be in the 

design and implementation phase. FAA Headquarters officials told us that they do 

not believe that Flight Standards needs full-time participation on most metroplex 

teams because the Agency only plans to focus on flight procedures that rely on 

current FAA standards and criteria. Further, Flight Standards is available for 

consultation as necessary. However, we found different views among FAA 

Headquarters, field and industry representatives, and from FAA’s NextGen 

strategic plans regarding whether Flight Standards personnel should participate 

on metroplex teams. 

So far, Flight Standards representation on metroplex study teams has been 

limited. Although one of FAA’s Office of Aviation Safety NextGen goals is to 

include personnel from Flight Standards on teams to optimize PBN procedures,

only one of the metroplex study teams included a Flight Standards representative.

It will be important for Flight Standards personnel to be involved in metroplex 

because Flight Standards approves all new flight procedures. Additionally, if the 

study teams identify RNP procedures that will cause a change in existing 

standards, Flight Standards’ early involvement could help to expedite these more 

efficient procedures and ensure safety. As we have reported in the past, 

coordination between Flight Standards and ATO is important in ensuring the safe 

development and integration of new flight procedures.21

In October 2010, ATO reorganized several key programs to form the Mission

Support Services organization. This group provides shared services to ATO’s 

operational lines of businesses: Terminal, En Route, Oceanic, Technical 

Operations, and System Operations Services. While this reorganization may help 

 20 OIG Testimony Number CC-2009-086, “Challenges in Implementing Performance-Based Navigation in the U.S. 

Air Transportation System,” July 29, 2009. 21 OIG Report Number AV-2011-025, “FAA Needs To Implement More Efficient Performance-Based Navigation 

Procedures and Clarify the Role of Third Parties,” December 10, 2010.
14

resolve stovepipes within the ATO, it does not address the issue of working with 

organizations outside the ATO, including Flight Standards and Aircraft 

Certification.

22

FAA Has Not Yet Resolved Key Policy Issues

FAA also established a new office in response to the task force’s 

recommendation for a single point of responsibility for surface initiatives, which 

span several ATO organizations. FAA is making other significant organizational 

changes in how it manages NextGen, but it is too soon to determine whether these 

changes will improve FAA’s ability to work effectively across different lines of

business.

The task force encouraged FAA to continue to develop a “best-equipped, bestserved policy” (i.e., prioritizing air traffic control services for those users 

equipped with new systems) and to revamp information sharing systems to better 

manage airport surfaces. FAA recognizes that these are important issues and 

continues to work with industry to reach a consensus on strategies concerning 

equipage for NextGen and identifying processes and standards for data sharing. 

However, FAA does not yet have a clear plan for transitioning to the new 

policies. 

Additionally, many air traffic control policies and procedures have not been 

updated to incorporate the increased capabilities of satellite-based technologies. 

For example, to accommodate PBN operations, controllers will require new 

guidance on areas such as phraseology and separation requirements to allow them 

to safely manage RNAV/RNP operations in a mixed equipage environment; 

however, FAA has not yet updated the controller handbook with this guidance.

To its credit, the Agency recently adopted a key policy change to allow RNP 

operations at airports with parallel runways, an issue that had been hindering 

controllers’ ability to give pilots the clearance to land. However, this limited 

action occurred only after a lengthy 4-year safety study conducted at the George 

Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) in Houston. Further, inconsistent 

interpretation of FAA’s environmental policies has caused delays. To address this 

problem, FAA is standardizing environmental specialist training to ensure 

consistent compliance with environmental regulations for all instrument flight 

procedures, but it will take 4 to 5 years to completely develop the training 

curriculum.

 22 FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) supports NextGen by administering safety standards that govern the 

design, production, and airworthiness of aircraft, engines, and avionics. 
15

FAA Faces Challenges With Timely Implementation of New Flight 

Procedures

FAA’s process for developing and implementing new flight procedures is timeconsuming and fragmented. In a September 2010 internal study,

23

In June 2011, FAA issued its Navigation Procedures Implementation Plan (NAV 

Lean) for executing the 21 recommendations. However, the metroplex initiative 

may not benefit from these significant streamlining efforts. While some of the 

recommendations can be implemented within relatively short timeframes and

may provide incremental benefits when completed, realizing maximum benefits

will not be achieved until FAA completes all 21 recommendations. Those efforts 

could take as long as 5 years and by that time the Agency will be nearing the end 

of its metroplex program. Although airlines representatives commended FAA for 

launching the NAV Lean program to expedite the deployment of high-value 

procedures, they have stated that they cannot afford to wait that long because the 

technology already exists today.

FAA

concluded that the current system is ineffective. FAA reported numerous 

problems, such as the lack of an expedited process for approving procedures that 

have only minor revisions, inconsistent interpretation of environmental policies 

and guidance, and inconsistencies in data. To address these problems, FAA made 

21 recommendations for streamlining the process for deploying new procedures. 

Implementing the NAV Lean recommendations in a timely manner will be 

especially important for the Houston metroplex project. In October 2011, the 

White House announced that the Houston metroplex project had been selected as 

1 of 14 infrastructure projects nationwide to be expedited through more efficient 

and effective permitting and environmental reviews. This initiative is one of the 

Administration’s steps to help projects nationwide move more quickly from start 

to finish. Through this initiative, FAA will also be held accountable for tracking 

progress to ensure the project is completed within 24 months, which is much 

sooner than the original timeframe of 3 years established for each metroplex 

project. With the Houston project, FAA will be expected to accelerate its work by 

streamlining the environmental review process, a key focus of the NAV Lean 

recommendations.

FAA also published its first Aviation Safety (AVS) Work Plan in March 2010

and updated it in March 2011 to incorporate safety-related actions in response to 

RTCA task force recommendations. While many of these initiatives are 

underway, some of these initiatives will likely take years to complete. For 

example, updating air traffic policies concerning separation standards will 

require, comprehensive, and lengthy safety assessments. Another time-consuming 

 23 FAA’s Navigation (NAV) Lean Instrument Flight Procedures Report, September 2010.
16

initiative involving implementing PBN for closely spaced parallel runway 

operations is not expected to be completed until 2015.

FAA Faces Challenges With Training Controllers on New, Advanced 

Flight Procedures

While FAA is training controllers on NextGen initiatives, FAA’s training on 

existing and emerging NextGen procedures has been limited. National Air Traffic 

Controllers Association officials stated that training on new RNAV and RNP 

procedures should be timely and include simulator training to be effective. Yet, 

FAA’s recent NextGen-related training has often only consisted of briefings 

rather than comprehensive training on RNAV and RNP. 

Moreover, as we also reported in January 2012, FAA’s national training program 

has not yet provided critical facilities with the training resources (e.g., simulator 

training) they need, and NextGen deployment will further strain training 

resources as both a large number of new hires24 and veteran controllers must learn 

new air traffic procedures. The controller workforce will not only have to work 

with existing systems and procedures but also transition to new roles and 

responsibilities—from controlling to managing air traffic—as envisioned for 

NextGen. Therefore, keeping controller training and resources up to speed with 

NextGen developments and procedures will be difficult, especially at metroplex 

locations. For example, our work has identified at least 8 facilities that are 

included in the metroplex initiative that have more than 25 percent of their 

controllers in training (the national average).25

To its credit, FAA has begun working to improve the effectiveness of its 

controller training methods. For example, FAA has redesigned training courses to 

accommodate changes in automation technology. However, without adequate 

training and familiarity with new instrument flight procedures, controllers are 

reluctant to allow pilots to use these new procedures, especially in a mixed 

equipage environment where many aircraft are not equipped or approved to use 

the new procedures. 

At these facilities, FAA will be 

heavily focused on training new controllers for their regular duties at the same 

time it is deploying new NextGen flight procedures. 

 24 FAA plans to hire and train nearly 11,000 new controllers through fiscal year 2020 to replace the large number of 

controllers retiring. 25 As we recently reported, new controllers comprise up to 25 percent of the air traffic controller workforce, with 

some high activity locations as high as 40 percent. OIG Report Number AV-2012-039, “Enhanced Oversight of 

Staffing and Training at FAA’s Critical Facilities Is Needed To Maintain Continuity of Operations,” January 12, 

2012.
17

Metroplex Benefits Are Contingent on Modernizing Systems That 

Controllers Rely on To Manage Air Traffic

A roadblock for the Metroplex effort in terms of realizing the full near- and longterm benefits of new routes is FAA’s ability to modernize the displays and 

processors controllers rely on to manage takeoffs and landings, the most critical 

phases of flight. The RTCA task force report, as well a February 2012 report from 

the NAC,

26 emphasized that to obtain the full benefits of new performance-based 

routes, controllers need new automated tools, such as the Relative Position 

Indicator,

27

A key segment of FAA’s modernization effort involves the installation of new 

controller displays and computers at 11 high activity locations, such as New 

York, Chicago, and Atlanta. However, there is uncertainty on when these 

installations will be completed and when new controller tools for enhancing 

capacity can be implemented. FAA will be unable to deliver the full range of 

benefits from its metroplex initiative, including more flexible routes, or introduce 

new capabilities until the systems controllers rely on to separate aircraft are 

modernized. In a separate audit, we are examining FAA’s efforts in modernizing 

terminal automation. 

to help merge and sequence aircraft in complex and busy airspace.

CONCLUSION

NextGen is an important effort to fundamentally change the way air traffic is 

managed and enhance the capacity and efficiency of the NAS. FAA’s response to 

the RTCA task force is an initial but important step toward implementing 

NextGen. However, FAA’s success in addressing the task force’s 

recommendations depends on timely follow-through and overcoming key 

barriers. To provide a solid foundation for NextGen, FAA must resolve the 

safety, policy, training, and organizational issues addressed by the task force. 

Further, both Government and industry must synchronize their planning and 

implementation efforts to effectively roll out NextGen initiatives and realize 

tangible benefits. Continued uncertainty about these efforts could undermine 

industry’s commitment to investing in NextGen technology—a critical element 

for successful implementation.

 26 Applying the Metroplex Prioritization Criteria & Mapping the Integrated Capabilities to Identified Metroplexes, 

February 2012. 27 The Relative Position Indicator is automation pioneered by the MITRE Corporation to help controllers manage 

performance-based navigation operations at busy airports. The tool accounts for complex aircraft flight path and 

allows controllers to detect potential conflicts and address them sooner than with current technology.
18

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Develop and commit to a plan with milestones for the more integrated and 

sophisticated metroplex capabilities as envisioned by airspace users and the 

task force. 

2. Establish a process to select metroplex team leads well in advance of the time 

that design and implementation teams are scheduled to begin and include all 

stakeholders, including Flight Standards’ personnel, involved in implementing 

new flight procedures.

3. Evaluate combining the metroplex study and design team processes to 

accelerate the completion of FAA’s metroplex initiative.

4. Adequately document and prioritize projects identified by metroplex teams 

that have the potential for significant benefits, but are not included in 

metroplex.

5. Establish a formal mechanism to communicate metroplex progress that allows 

continual feedback and coordination with airlines and local FAA air traffic 

officials as work progresses at each metroplex site. 

6. Develop a comprehensive RNAV/RNP controller training program on 

applying new metroplex advanced procedures in a mixed-equipage 

environment. 

7. Establish a formal process for reporting barriers identified by metroplex teams 

(i.e., policies, procedures, operational approval processes, training, criteria, 

and equipage and technology issues) and put in place a mechanism to ensure 

they are adequately resolved. 

AGENCY COMMENTS AND OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

RESPONSE 

We provided FAA with our draft report on May 14, 2012, and received its 

response on July 3, 2012. FAA’s response is included in its entirety as an 

appendix to this report. FAA concurred or partially concurred with six 

recommendations and did not concur with one recommendation. Based on FAA’s 

response, we consider recommendation 2 resolved but open pending completion 

of planned actions. We also consider recommendation 5 resolved and closed. 

However, we are concerned that FAA’s responses did not meet the intent of 

recommendations 1, 4, 6, and 7. In addition, we are requesting a target date for 

the alternative actions proposed for recommendation 3, as detailed below.
19

FAA concurred with recommendation 1 and requested that we close it based on 

milestones established in FAA’s current metroplex initiative. However, as stated 

in our report, this effort does not include milestones for completing an approach 

that integrates other related capabilities recommended by the task force, such as 

better managing surface operations. As FAA indicated in its response, the NAC 

will be issuing recommendations in this area in September 2012; therefore, FAA 

should be well positioned at that time to develop milestones. Accordingly, we are 

requesting that FAA provide a target date for completing a detailed plan with 

milestones for the more integrated metroplex approach. 

FAA did not concur with recommendation 3, but requested that we close the 

recommendation based on the Agency’s determination that combining the study 

and design phases would not produce any benefits. Instead, FAA provided 

alternative actions to streamline the overall metroplex process using lessons 

learned from the Houston Expedited metroplex project. FAA’s planned 

alternative actions meet the intent of our recommendation; however, we are 

requesting that the Agency provide us with a target date for these actions. 

FAA concurred with recommendation 4 and requested that we close it based on a 

recently developed process outlined in the Agency’s metroplex operational plan. 

However, as stated in our report, FAA’s current process for prioritizing and 

tracking those projects is unclear—an issue that has also prompted concerns by 

industry representatives. Accordingly, we request that FAA provide additional 

information regarding the process established to prioritize and track those projects 

that are currently outside the scope of the metroplex initiative. 

FAA partially concurred with recommendation 6 and requested that we close it 

based on future plans to train controllers on procedures developed in the 

metroplex initiative and strategic efforts to align current training with NextGen 

future training requirements. However, FAA did not provide target dates for any 

of the future training initiatives. Additionally, FAA responded that it is too soon 

to develop controller training on operations in a mixed equipage environment. 

Yet, controller concerns about the lack of training on managing aircraft with 

differing capabilities are already limiting the use of more advanced procedures at 

several airports today. Accordingly, we request that FAA reconsider its position 

to delay this advanced training and provide target dates for accomplishing the 

training. 

FAA requested that we close recommendation 7 based on a recent process 

established in the metroplex operational plan. However, this process does not 

include a procedure or mechanism to verify that identified barriers, such as 

outdated policies or a lack of training, are adequately resolved, particularly at the 

local level. To advance NextGen and realize expected benefits, FAA must 

aggressively track its progress on resolving such barriers, so that the Agency can 
20

move to the more integrated approach envisioned by the task force. Accordingly, 

we request that FAA provide clarifying information on actions taken or planned 

to ensure identified barriers are adequately resolved. 

ACTIONS REQUIRED 

FAA’s actions taken and planned for recommendation 2 are responsive and we 

consider it resolved but open pending completion of the planned actions. We 

consider recommendation 5 resolved and closed. In accordance with DOT Order 

8000.1C, we request that FAA provide additional information or reconsider its 

position for recommendations 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7 within 30 days of this report.

We appreciate the courtesies and cooperation of FAA representatives during this 

audit. If you have any questions concerning this report, please call me at 

(202) 366-0500 or Robin Koch, Program Director, at (404) 562-3770.

#

cc: Pierre McLeod, AAE-100

Martin Gertel, M-1
21

Exhibit A. Key RTCA Task Force Recommendations for NextGen's 

Mid-Term Phase

EXHIBIT A. KEY RTCA TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 

NEXTGEN’S MID-TERM PHASE

Source: OIG

Rec’s Area Recommended Capability

4 Airport Surface Operations Improve the management of airport taxiways, gates, and parking 

areas by revamping systems for sharing information between FAA, 

airline operations centers and airports. Candidate locations include all 

major airports beginning with the New York area airports.

5 Runway Access Improve the use of converging or closely spaced runways during low 

visibility conditions. Candidate airports include Kennedy, Las Vegas, 

and Newark.

4 Metroplex Airspace Improve the capacity of airspace that affects multiple airports near 

large metropolitan areas, including Chicago, New York/New Jersey, 

and Southern California.

4 High-Altitude Cruise Improve high-altitude flights by, among other things, increasing the 

availability of real-time data on the status of airspace used jointly by 

civilian and military aircraft. The first candidate location is Minneapolis 

Center.

2 Access to the National 

Airspace System

Improve service at smaller airports by implementing more precision 

approaches and departures and expanding ways to track aircraft in 

non-radar airspace. Full range of candidate locations is still under 

development.

Cross-Cutting

4 Integrated Air Traffic 

Management

Create an Integrated Air Traffic Management System that leverages 

new technologies and collaboration with users and implement 

solutions to traffic flow problems that are effectively integrated across 

air traffic control domains to achieve service providers’ and users’

efficiency goals.

5 Data Communications Improve cruise and transition operations by using data 

communications to enable more efficient use of available or forecast 

capacity in the National Airspace System. Increase the ability to better 

adapt to changing conditions through improved dissemination of 

tactical reroutes around weather forecast and congestion.

Overarching

1 Achieve existing separation standards.

1 Incentivize equipage.

1 Streamline the operational approval and certification processes for 

new flight procedures.

1 Establish institutional mechanisms for transparency and collaboration 

in the planning, implementation, and post-execution assessments.

Total: 

32
22

Exhibit B. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

EXHIBIT B. OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY

At the request of the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure, and Subcommittee on Aviation, we performed 

an audit of FAA’s response to the RTCA Task Force recommendations. The 

objectives of this audit were to assess the extent to which FAA is (1) responding to 

the Task Force recommendations, including adjusting its budgets and establishing 

mechanisms for continued industry collaboration, and (2) addressing barriers that 

may hinder FAA’s ability to successfully implement the recommendations. On 

December 21, 2010, we issued an interim report on the status of FAA’s response 

to RTCA’s recommendations to then Ranking Members Mica and Petri and 

Chairman Oberstar and Costello.

1

To determine the extent to which FAA responded to the recommendations, we 

analyzed the March 2010 and March 2011 NextGen Implementation Plans to 

determine how FAA allocates its resources and the milestones to implement the 

recommendations. Further, we reviewed the 2010 NextGen Segment 

Implementation Plan for detailed milestones. We also reviewed work at FAA 

Headquarters and interviewed officials at program offices responsible for planning 

and executing the RTCA recommendations in each of the five major areas along 

with the cross-cutting and overarching recommendations. We met with the 

Director of NextGen Implementation Performance & Reporting and the Director 

of NextGen Integration and Implementation to determine how FAA is managing 

implementation.

As agreed with the requesters, we assessed 

FAA’s overall response to the task force recommendations, but focused our audit 

specifically on FAA’s efforts to implement an initiative known as “metroplex,” 

which aims to improve the efficiency of airspace that affects multiple airports near 

large metropolitan areas.

To assess the extent to which FAA is adjusting its budgets we examined FAA’s 

operational plans, project level agreements, Capital Investment Plans, and other 

budget documents. We interviewed FAA budget officials and NextGen Solution 

Set Managers. Finally, we reviewed FAA’s portfolio management program.

To examine the mechanisms for continued industry collaboration, we met with 

several major airline representatives. We discussed their views of the metroplex 

effort to date. Further, we interviewed the RTCA Inc. president and attended the

NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC) and subcommittee (NACSC) meetings. 

During these meetings we engaged industry members to determine their 

assessment of FAA’s efforts to respond to the task force recommendations. 

 1 OIG Report CC-2011-001, Letter to Chairmen Oberstar and Costello and Ranking Members Mica and Petri 

Regarding FAA's Efforts to Implement RTCA Task Force Recommendations for NextGen, December 21, 2010. OIG 

reports are available on our website: www.oig.dot.gov. 
23

Exhibit B. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

To assess barriers that may hinder FAA’s ability to successfully implement the 

task force recommendations, we evaluated any differences between the 

recommendations and FAA’s plan. We reviewed the results of the Washington 

DC, North Texas (Dallas), Houston, Northern California, and Charlotte metroplex 

study teams, and interviewed several members of the Washington DC and North 

Texas teams. We also conducted site visits to key air traffic facilities in the Dallas 

and Washington DC metropolitan areas.

We conducted this audit from June 2010 through April 2012 in accordance with 

generally accepted Government auditing standards prescribed by the Comptroller 

General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the 

audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence that provides a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the 

evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives.
24

Exhibit C. Organizations Visited or Contacted

EXHIBIT C. ORGANIZATIONS VISITED OR CONTACTED

FAA Headquarters, Washington DC

• Air Traffic Organization 

o NextGen and Operations Planning 

o Mission Support Services 

o Terminal Operations Services 

o En Route and Oceanic Services 

• Aircraft Certification Service 

• Flight Standards Service 

• Office of Environment and Energy

FAA Field Facilities

• Fort Worth Air Route Traffic Control Center (Center), Fort Worth, TX

• Dallas Forth Worth (DFW) International Airport Air Traffic Control 

Tower, Fort Worth, TX.

• DFW Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON), Dallas, TX

• Eastern Service Office, College Park, GA

• Fort Worth Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base, Fort Worth TX

• Meacham International Airport, Fort Worth TX

• Potomac TRACON, Warrenton, VA

• Southern Region Office, College Park, GA

• Washington Center, Leesburg, VA

Aviation Stakeholders

• American Airlines, Fort Worth, TX

• Delta Airlines, Atlanta GA

• GE Aviation PBN Services, Renton WA

• MITRE Corporation, McLean VA

• National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), Washington DC

• RTCA Inc., Washington, DC

• US Airways, Phoenix, AZ

• Southwest Airlines, Dallas, TX

• Air Line Pilots Association, Washington, DC
25

Exhibit D. Major Contributors to This Report

EXHIBIT D. MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT

Robin Koch Program Director

Name Title

Coletta Treakle Project Manager

Raymond Denmark Senior Analyst

Kevin Montgomery Senior Analyst

Claudia Estrada Analyst

James Ovelmen Analyst 

Andrea Nossaman Senior Writer

Audre Azuolas Writer-Editor
APPENDIX. AGENCY COMMENTS 26

Appendix. Agency Comments

Federal Aviation

Administration

Memorandum

Date: July 3, 2012

To: Jeffrey B. Guzzetti, Director, Assistant Inspector General for Aviation and 

Special Program Audits 

From: H. Clayton Foushee, Director, Office of Audit and Evaluation, AAE-1

Subject: FAA Response to Office of Inspector General (OIG) Draft Report on

Implementing Near-Term NextGen Capabilities 

As part of the implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System 

(NextGen), FAA is working with industry recommendations of near-term improvements

through the initiation of the Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex 

(OAPM) effort. The aim of this effort is to have study groups identify near-term 

Performance Based Navigation (PBN) improvements coupled with airspace sector 

adjustments that can be completed in a major metropolitan area in approximately three 

years. These metroplex areas include complicated airspace management issues usually 

encompassing a number of major commercial airports, as well as general aviation 

airports. FAA will continue to work with the aviation community to meet the broader set 

of integrated metroplex capabilities beyond airspace and procedures, as they mature and 

are ready for operational use. Given the complexity of operations in the National 

Airspace System (NAS) and the number of capabilities expected in the mid to far term 

such as Data Communications, Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast, etc., 

Metroplex work will be ongoing for years to come. 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSES

Recommendation 1: Develop and commit to a plan with milestones for the more 

integrated and sophisticated metroplex capabilities as envisioned by airspace users and 

the task force.

FAA Response: Concur. FAA has committed to an integrated approach for delivery of 

airspace and procedures through OAPM. The OAPM initiative is an FAA program 

designed to deliver the benefits of Performance Based Navigation through the 

development and deployment of Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation 

Performance (RNP) in terminal, en route, and approach procedures in a focused 

geographic area called a metroplex. Benefit delivery is predicated on consistent and 

repeatable processes used to identify, design, and deploy the right procedure(s) for the 
Appendix. Agency Comments

27

right metroplex location. There are always a wide range of possible solutions to deliver 

benefits. Those solutions must integrate with all air traffic flows to allow safe and 

efficient operations. An RNP approach is one kind of PBN solution possible. The 

OAPM Study Teams consider all PBN solutions but whether RNP is chosen as a solution 

depends on whether it will provide benefit to the overall operation of the Metroplex when 

all operational needs are considered. RNP does not work everywhere and will not be 

deployed everywhere in the near to mid-term. There are 13 metroplex sites that OAPM 

will cover in the next 5 years. Those are DC Metro; North Texas; Charlotte; Northern 

California; Houston; Atlanta; Southern California; Florida; Phoenix; Chicago; Memphis; 

Cleveland/Detroit; and Boston. Procedures are currently in development in DC Metro, 

North Texas; Charlotte; Houston; Atlanta; and Northern California with implementations 

beginning in FY13 and FY14. Procedure development will begin in Southern California 

in FY13; with implementation to begin in FY15. Study activities began in Florida in 

FY12; development will be in FY13 and implementation will begin in FY15. Work in 

Phoenix and Chicago will start in FY13 with implementation beginning in FY15. 

Memphis; Cleveland/Detroit; and Boston begin work in FY14 with implementation 

beginning in FY16 and FY17. The OAPM Dash Board Summary provided in 

Attachment 1 at the end of this document shows the milestones for the OAPM project. 

In addition, PBN work is being done at a host of other sites outside the OAPM program. 

Some of those sites are Seattle; Las Vegas; Reno; Charleston; Louisville; Raleigh; 

Denver; Nashville; LaGuardia; St. Louis; Philadelphia; Anchorage; Long Beach; and 

Minneapolis. Over 750 PBN departure and arrival procedures are in the NAS today with 

another 300 planned within the next 18 months. In addition, over 300 RNP Authorization 

Required are in the NAS today with another 120 or so planned within the next 18 months. 

As previously noted, there are other NextGen capabilities that will be integrated into the 

Metroplex as they mature. FAA is working collaboratively with the NextGen Advisory 

Committee (NAC) on the implementation of the broader set of integrated metroplex 

capabilities beyond airspace and procedures. The NAC recently completed the mapping 

of NextGen capabilities to specific metroplexes and FAA expects to have additional 

inputs from the Committee in the form of actionable recommendations in September 

2012. FAA request that this recommendation be closed.

Recommendation 2: Establish a process to select metroplex team leads well in advance 

of the time that design and implementation teams are scheduled to begin and include all 

stakeholders, including Flight Standards’ personnel, involved in implementing new flight 

procedures.

FAA Response: Partially Concur. The FAA agrees that early selection of team leads 

will be a critical factor in the timeliness and success of this effort. FAA now has a 

process to recruit and select qualified team leads in place since the roll-out schedule is 

complete. To meet programmatic needs, we are using a combination of permanent and 

detailed Headquarters management positions through competitive selection processes to 

oversee OAPM activities. The job announcements for the permanent selections are in 

process in the Office of Human Resources. We expect permanent selections to be in 
Appendix. Agency Comments

28

place by the end of CY12. In addition, the Air Traffic Organization instituted a “detail” 

approval process in early FY12 to insure proper coordination and approvals were 

obtained for all detailed personnel. This process has worked smoothly to date to insure 

release dates and adequate lead time. 

Our current formal processes such as the 18-Step PBN process include multiple lines of 

business, Aeronautical Navigation Products, and Flight Standards, among others, by 

directive. Flight Standards is also engaged at the program level through the Metroplex 

Core Team, and has knowledge of all OAPM procedure production plans through the 

Regional Airspace Procedures Team/National Airspace Procedures Team process. Since 

OAPM primarily focuses on procedures that meet current standards and criteria, full-time 

participation by Flight Standards is not necessary, though they are available for additional 

consultation as needed. FAA believes that we have met the intent of the recommendation 

and request that this recommendation be closed.

 

Recommendation 3: Evaluate combining the metroplex study and design team 

processes to accelerate the completion of FAA’s metroplex initiative. 

FAA Response: Non-concur. FAA has evaluated combining study and design. The 

study phase is conducted by non-locally staffed study teams that identify issues and 

propose potential PBN and/or airspace solutions through facility and industry interface 

meetings. The result of this phase is a set of conceptual designs, with a high-level 

assessment of benefits, costs, and risks. 

Design & Implementation (D&I) teams are more locally focused as it is recognized that 

local expertise and acceptance is a critical part of the more intricate D&I process. 

Combining the two team structures would not take full advantage of the separate 

strengths that each team provides. Additionally, the study results are used to determine if 

potential benefits warrant proceeding with subsequent phases. Therefore, FAA believes 

that combining these two teams will not produce any benefits to the metroplex initiatives. 

FAA is however committed to streamlining the overall OAPM process wherever possible 

using lessons learned. FAA believes the lessons learned from the Houston Expedited 

OAPM activity could allow FAA to shorten the timeline for subsequent projects.

Recommendation 4: Adequately document and prioritize projects identified by 

metroplex teams that have the potential for significant benefits, but are not included in 

metroplex.

FAA Response: Concur. Study teams document all identified issues and categorize 

those that are outside of the OAPM scope (i.e., outside timeline, beyond Environmental 

Assessment, etc.) for consideration within other initiatives. The OAPM Operational Plan 

outlines the process that will be followed:

“If the Study Team identifies issues that cannot be addressed within the 

timeframe, budget and/or criteria boundaries of an OAPM project, 

these issues are directed to appropriate offices within the FAA. These 

issues are to be documented in a formal memo by the Operational 
Appendix. Agency Comments

29

Program Manager for OAPM for signature by the Airspace Services 

Director.”

FAA request that this recommendation be closed.

Recommendation 5: Establish a formal mechanism to communicate metroplex progress 

that allows continual feedback and coordination with airlines and local FAA air traffic 

officials as work progresses at each metroplex site.

FAA Response: Concur. The FAA has a formal mechanism to inform internal and 

external FAA stakeholders on the status and progress of OAPM efforts. Internally, 

weekly teleconferences are held with Headquarters, Facility and Service Area personnel. 

The NextGen Management Board reviews status on a monthly basis, and teams conduct 

regular briefings on site, and at Service Areas/Service Centers. Externally, the FAA 

shares progress through many groups including the NextGen Advisory Committee

Airspace and Procedures Working Group and regional Task Groups, Airlines for America 

(A4A) Operations Group and A4A Air Traffic Operations Council. Status and progress 

is also shared via the White House Infrastructure Dashboard and the NextGen websites. 

A summary of the dashboard report for the OAPM project is provided (attachment 1). 

FAA request that this recommendation be closed.

Recommendation 6: Develop a comprehensive RNAV/RNP controller training program 

on applying new metroplex advanced procedures in a mixed-equipage environment.

FAA Response: Partially Concur. The FAA concurs that a controller training program 

commensurate with the scope of the changes introduced at each metroplex site will be 

developed. In the 2013-2015 metroplex time frame, operational improvements are 

planned to be based on existing equipage to improve efficient descents, diverging 

departure paths and the decoupling of operations among airports within the metroplex 

airspace. These types of changes can be handled using existing controller training 

development and deployment techniques, tailored to the unique criteria of each metroplex 

environment.

The FAA has strategic efforts underway to align current training with NextGen future 

training requirements and is working closely with the NextGen Human Factors offices on 

a Strategic Training Needs Assessment initiative. The curriculum architecture effort aims 

to align training with a comprehensive occupational job task analysis so that critical 

functions can be traced to training elements such as instructional methods, training 

equipment (e.g., simulation), and assessment strategy. In addition, the FAA has funded 

research projects to examine NextGen training alternatives and methodologies.

While it remains possible that elements of advanced training on operations in a mixed 

equipage environment will be needed in the near term to support metroplex activities at 

certain locations, the operational plan for such a change needs to mature further prior to 

training development. FAA believes that we have met the intent of the recommendation 

and request that this recommendation be closed.
Appendix. Agency Comments

30

Recommendation 7: Establish a formal process for reporting barriers identified by 

metroplex teams (i.e., policies, procedures, operational approval processes, training, 

criteria, and equipage and technology issues) and put in place a mechanism to ensure they 

are adequately resolved.

FAA Response: Concur. FAA formal process for reporting barriers exist in the OAPM 

Operational Plan. Barriers that are identified by teams are documented and forwarded to 

the appropriate FAA office for resolution as called for in the OAPM Operational Plan. 

FAA request that this recommendation be closed. 
Appendix. Agency Comments

31

Attachment 1