FLIGHT DELAY TASK FORCE REPORT Cincinnati Barcelona Mexico City Antigua

12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P FLIGHT DELAY TASK FORCE REPORT Cincinnati Barcelona Mexico City Antigua Stockholm Columbus Lisbon Denver Sydney Providence Detroit Kuala Lampur Tampa Los Angeles San Francisco St. Louis Las Vegas Athens Fort Lauderdale Miami Hamburg Salt Lake City Stockholm Vancouver Seattle Bejing Melbourne Nassau Qúebec City Barcelona Memphis Antigua Stockholm Wash DC–Dulles Vienna Sacramento Cincinnati 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 04 01 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 212 111 711 102 024 176 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 212 923 711 102 024 176 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 Bejing Melbourne Rome Qúebec City Barcelona Paris–CDG Antigua Stockholm Wash DC–Dulles London Amsterdam Sydney Hong Kong St. Louis Kuala Lampur Seattle Vienna San Francisco Acapulco Milan Athens Chicago–O’Hare Cancun Providence Aruba Stockholm Vancouver Zürich Nassau Seattle Las Vegas Savannah Montreal Detroit Antigua San Antonio Fort Lauderdale Sacramento Pittsburgh Shannon Memphis Boston Manchester Nice San Diego Minneapolis Charleston Puerto Vallarta Oslo Palm Springs Munich Montreal Copenhagen Nantucket Vancouver Portland Orlando Melbourne Miami Mexico City San Diego Shannon 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 04 01 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 04 18 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 11 17 20 18 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 197 396 822 677 621 116 212 111 711 102 024 176 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 212 111 711 102 024 176 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 Dallas Prague Houston Milan Minneapolis Memphis Palm Springs Puerto Vallarta Oslo Portland Los Angeles Frankfurt Vienna Orlando Singapore Salt Lake City Munich Geneva Aruba San Antonio Vancouver Tokyo Tampa Copenhagen 09 22 06 21 03 15 04 01 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 6:21P 8:22P 2:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 4:55P 5:10P 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 3:50P 4:12 12:00P 12:05P 12:24P 1:05P 1:15P 1:25P 1:29P 2:15P 2:30P 2:32P 3:17P 3:30P 3:35P 3:50P 4:05P 4:45P 212 111 711 102 024 126 16 42 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 212 111 711 102 024 176 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 111 913 012 178 112 126 612 160 197 396 822 778 621 116 212 111 711 102 Montreal 04 4:55P 024 Los Angeles Dublin 01 5:10P 176 Copenhagen Amsterdam 32 12:00P 012 Acapulco Miami 07 12:05P 178 Tokyo Nantucket 12 12:24P 112 Sacramento Boston 18 1:05P 126 Fort Lauderdale Houston 19 1:15P 612 Cancun Los Angeles 26 1:25P 160 Paris–CDG San Diego 21 1:29P 197 Naples Las Vegas 02 2:15P 396 Frankfurt Naples 11 3:50P 111 Pittsburgh Atlanta 17 4:12 913 Providence Dallas 20 12:00P 012 Hamburg Manchester 18 12:05P 178 Melbourne Lisbon 09 12:24P 112 Denver Prague 22 1:05P 126 Munich Charleston 01 1:15P 612 Puerto Vallarta Zürich 11 1:25P 160 Houston Shannon 21 1:29P 197 Vienna Minneapolis 02 2:15P 396 Stockholm Seattle 11 2:30P 822 Mexico City St. Louis 17 2:32P 778 Dallas Savannah 20 3:17P 621 Amsterdam Hamburg 18 3:30P 116 Geneva Antigua 09 3:35P 212 Minneapolis Miami 22 3:50P 111 Orlando Palm Springs 06 4:05P 711 Kuala Lampur Oslo 14 4:45P 102 Tampa Houston 03 4:55P 024 Memphis Columbus 15 5:10P 176 San Francisco Hong Kong 04 12:00P 012 Montreal Dublin 01 12:05P 178 Columbus Frankfurt 32 12:24P 112 Prague Savannah 07 1:05P 126 Manchester Portland 12 1:15P 612 Shannon Salt Lake City 05 1:25P 160 Copenhagen Acapulco 21 1:29P 197 Cincinnati San Antonio Milan 02 Teterboro 111 Vancouver Sacramento 11 3:50P 913 Nice Pittsburgh 17 4:12 Lisbon Geneva 20 12:00P 012 Melbourne Paris–CDG 18 12:05P 178 Geneva Aruba 09 12:24P 112 126 Qúebec City Naples 22 1:05P 612 Tokyo Singapore 01 1:15P 160 San Diego Zürich 11 1:25P 197 Antigua Denver 21 1:29P 396 Stockholm Melbourne 02 2:15P 822 Wash DC–Dulles Detroit 11 2:30P 778 London Charleston 17 2:32P 621 Amsterdam Barcelona 20 3:17P 116 Sydney Paris–CDG 18 3:30P 212 Hong Kong Nassau 09 3:35P 111 Dublin San Antonio 22 3:50P 711 Kuala Lampur Charleston 06 4:05P 102 Cairo Singapore 14 4:45P 024 Los Angeles Salt Lake City 03 4:55P 176 San Francisco Sydney 15 5:10P Acapulco Hong Kong 04 12:00P 012 Milan Nice 01 12:05P 178 flight delay task force report |  Athens Kuala Lampur 32 12:24P 112 126 Chicago–O’Hare Cairo 07 1:05P DECEMBER 6, 2007 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 04 01 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 01 11 21 02 11 17 20 18 09 22 06 14 03 15 04 01 32 07 12 05 21 02 11 17 INTRODUCTION.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Flight Delay Task Force .....................................................................................................2 Federal Initiatives ........................................................................................................................3 The Task Force Report ...............................................................................................................3 Highlights from the Report ......................................................................................................4 Short Term: Managing Delays .....................................................................................4 Long Term: Expanding Capacity..................................................................................4 Customer Service: Improving the Customer Experience ....................................5 OVERVIEW.OF.THE.TECHNICAL.RECOMMENDATIONS:.. MANAGING.DELAYS.AND.EXPANDING.CAPACITY. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 6 Improve Ground Traffic Movement .......................................................................................7 Develop Use of RNAV................................................................................................................7 Improve Flight Routes ...............................................................................................................7 Implement New Technologies ...............................................................................................8 Reduce Excess Spacing .............................................................................................................8 CUSTOMER.SERVICE.RECOMMENDATIONS:.. IMPROVING.THE.CUSTOMER.EXPERIENCE ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 Create and Implement a Communications Plan ............................................................10 Improve Coordination Of Existing Customer Service Programs And Expand Use Of Community-Wide Programs .......................................12 Enhance Airport Accommodations and Transportation Planning .............................14 APPENDIX.A.–.TECHNICAL.RECOMMENDATIONS. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 Near-Term Recommendations..............................................................................................15 Improve Ground Traffic Movement on the Airports ............................................15 Increase Departure Capacity ......................................................................................15 Increase Arrival Capacity ..............................................................................................17 More Efficient Airspace Utilization ............................................................................18 Improve Information to Fixes .....................................................................................18 Mid-Term Recommendations .............................................................................................. 20 Airspace Initiatives ....................................................................................................... 20 Improving Capacity in Severe Weather Conditions ........................................... 21 Area Navigation (RNAV) Development ................................................................. 22 Develop Technology ................................................................................................... 23 Next-Gen Technologies .............................................................................................. 23 Long-Term Recommendations ............................................................................................ 25 Technical Working Group Members ................................................................................................... 27 Customer Service Working Group Members ................................................................................... 28 flight delay taSK fORCe MeMBeRS Gerard Arpey David Barger Giovanni Bisignani Dennis Bone Cory Booker James Coyne Anthony R. Coscia Daniel Doctoroff William DeCota James P. Fox Patrick Foye Astrid Glynn Terry Hennessey Scott Kirby Kris Kolluri Joseph Kolshak Robert Lekites Susan Bass Levin William Logue James May Kevin Mitchell Steven Rohleder Gary Rose Anthony E. Shorris Jeffrey Smisek Robert Sturgell Jonathan Tisch Timothy Zagat Chief Executive Officer, American Airlines Chief Executive Officer, JetBlue Airways Director General & CEO, International Air Transport Association President, Verizon New Jersey Mayor, City of Newark President, National Air Transport Association Chairman, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Deputy Mayor for Economic Development and Rebuilding, City of New York Director of Aviation, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Principal, Warrington Fox Shuffler Chairman, Empire State Development Corp./Downstate Commissioner, New York State Department of Transportation President, Kennedy Airport Airline Management Council President, US Airways Commissioner, New Jersey Department of Transportation Executive Vice President of Operations, Delta Airlines Vice President and Manager, Airline Operations, UPS Airlines First Deputy Executive Director, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Senior Vice President of Operations, Federal Express President & CEO, Air Transport Association Chairman, Business Travel Coalition Chief Operating Officer, Accenture Chief, New Jersey Office of Economic Growth Executive Director, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey President, Continental Airlines Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration Chairman & CEO, Loews Hotels Publisher, Zagat Survey  IntroductIon S AFE AND EFFICIENT AIR TRAVEL connects the New York metropolitan area with the rest of the world. We rely heavily on our airports for leisure travel, enabling the region’s population to travel practically anywhere around the globe and tourists to visit the region, and business travel supporting local industries that sustain the region’s standing as a global economic center. Last year, the region’s three major airports – John F. Kennedy International, LaGuardia, and Newark Liberty International – handled more than 104 million passengers and 2.7 million tons of cargo. The combined impact of aviation operations, airport investment and tourism generated almost half a million jobs, $22 billion in wages, and more than $61 billion in annual economic activity. In recent years, flight delays have plagued the U.S. aviation system, posing a threat to our nation’s economic growth and prosperity. In the first quarter 2007, the U.S. Department of Transportation reported the worst flight delays in 13 years. Nationally, 2007 is expected to be the worst year for flight delays in aviation history. The delay problem has hit passengers hard – stranding travelers at airports or on planes for long periods of time. Worsening delays have revealed critical gaps in customer service, particularly for passengers with special needs, such as parents with small children, the elderly, and foreign travelers. Beyond the hardship airline passengers have to endure, the problem of flight delays imposes serious costs on the economy. Each year, Americans lose over $9 billion in productivity from flight delays. The problem of flight delays is especially acute in the New York metropolitan area. JFK, LaGuardia and Newark have consistently ranked among the nation’s worst in on-time performance. From January to September 2007, only 57% of flights at Newark arrived on time, the worst in the nation. LaGuardia and JFK ranked second and third worst, with on time arrival rates of 58% and 59% respectively. Even worse, flight delays at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark have major human and economic impacts beyond the New York metropolitan area. The flight routes and airports that make up the global aviation system are deeply interdependent; if a single airport, especially a major hub like JFK or Newark, experiences heavy delays, those delays ripple throughout the system. It has been reported that 75% of the nation’s flight delays originate in the New York metropolitan area. Because the region’s three major airports account for 33% of the nation’s delays, every local delay causes more than two delays in other parts of the country. Left unaddressed, our region’s recurrent flight delay problems will begin to seriously constrain our regional and national economic growth. In May 2007, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) sponsored a regional Air Service Demand Study in collaboration with the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (Port Authority), the New York State Department of Transportation, and the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. The study projects a robust 50% growth in demand for air travel during the study period, leading to a total of 157 million passengers per year by 2025. The Port Authority has taken various steps to enhance capacity and meet air travel demand. Over the past ten years the agency has invested over $15 billion in upgrades at JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark. The Port Authority’s updated 2007-2016 capital plan includes an additional $6 billion for aviation-related expenditures. There are provisions for runway access improvements, modernization of airfield instruments, and rehabilitation of runways and taxiways – all projects with the potential to add efficiency to airport operations and reduce delays. One particularly important initiative is the $150 million JFK Flight Delay Reduction Program. This series of projects will increase operational flexibility on the airfield by creating capacity for simultaneous operations on three runways and reducing queuing times on taxiways. Simply put, it will allow more planes to take off and land at any given time, getting passengers to and from their destinations. Finally, in addition to all of these capital improvements, in November 2007, the Port Authority purchased the long-term lease for Stewart International Airport in Newburgh, NY. The modernization and expansion of this airport is expected to help meet the growing regional demand for air travel and alleviate delays at the three major airports. flight delay task force report |  IntroductIon On the federal level, the FAA is moving forward with the Airspace Redesign Program, which is intended to increase airspace capacity in the New York metropolitan region. This Program will consolidate several sectors of airspace under a single regional Air Traffic Control Center. The FAA estimates that the Program, once implemented, will reduce delays in the region by 20%. In February 2007, the FAA also announced its long-anticipated NextGen program, which envisions the use of satellite-based navigational systems across the national airspace, an important technological advance that will, over time, provide significant enhancements to the movement of air traffic. Although such targeted initiatives undertaken by the Port Authority and the FAA, among others, are essential, achieving a sustained, significant reduction in flight delays requires a comprehensive and proactive approach involving all of the major stakeholders in the aviation system. Recognizing this, in March 2007, the Port Authority and fourteen of the largest domestic passenger airlines and cargo carriers presented to the FAA a 17-point list of delay reduction initiatives that could be implemented in the near-term. The initial list and collaborative work prompted the Port Authority to call for the formation of a Flight Delay Task Force that would bring together a broad group of stakeholders to examine the problem of flight delays originating in the New York metropolitan area and develop a set of strategies to reduce them, where it is possible, and to mitigate their impact where it is not. the flight delay task force In July 2007, the Chairman and Executive Director of the Port Authority convened a high-level group of influential and interested stakeholders in our region’s aviation system to focus on the burgeoning problem of flight delays. The Flight Delay Task Force – composed of senior executives of major airline companies, officials from the FAA, state and local officials, representatives of terminal operators, other business leaders, transportation advocates, and Port Authority staff – was asked to develop recommendations for mitigating congestion and reducing flight delays in the New York metropolitan region, as well as to propose recommendations for improving the customer experience during extensive flight delays. Task Force members assembled three times at Port Authority headquarters in New York City. In addition, representatives designated by Task Force members formed Technical and Customer Service Working Groups that convened regularly during the six months that the Task Force was conducting its work. The Technical Working Group identified procedural, technological, and capital improvements that will help to expand capacity and reduce flight delays. Clearly, the ultimate aim is to reduce delays as much as possible. However some delays – such as those due to bad weather or technical malfunctions – are inevitable. For this reason, the industry must continue to improve its customer service offerings for passengers who experience delays, even as it works to reduce them. Accordingly, the Customer Service Working Group focused on initiatives that could improve the customer experience when delays occur. As necessary, the Port Authority provided the Task Force with staffing assistance and resources. The Task Force considered the findings and recommendations proposed by the Technical and Customer Service Working Groups. This report is a summary of the recommendations endorsed by the Task Force members.1 1 The Task Force also intends to meet in early summer 2008 to assess the implementation status of the recommendations contained in this report.  | flight delay task force report IntroductIon federal initiatives After the Port Authority announced the formation of the Task Force in July 2007, the federal government initiated efforts on several fronts aimed at reducing flight delays. In the summer of 2007, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Mary Peters, established a task force of high-ranking U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) and FAA officials that would propose recommendations for reducing flight delays in the New York metropolitan area. In September 2007, President Bush directed US DOT to develop a plan to alleviate congestion and reduce delays in the New York area. Secretary Peters subsequently announced the formation of the New York Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to explore various strategies. The ARC is composed of many of the participants in the Task Force, including representatives from the Port Authority and airlines operating at the New York area airports, and the Task Force’s Technical Working Group (discussed below) shared much of its work with the ARC. At the same time, DOT officials ordered a schedule reduction meeting for JFK airport, which called on airlines to make voluntary flight reductions. Further, in October 2007, the FAA proposed hourly capacity limits at JFK, beginning in Spring 2008, of 80 flights per hour between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., except for the period between 3 p.m. and 8 p.m. when the limit is 81 flights per hour. This would cut the existing number of flight operations by 20% at JFK. US DOT has also asked the ARC to consider market based solutions such as congestion pricing– charging airlines higher fees for operating flights during peak hours – as an additional means of reducing congestion and flight delays. the task force Report This report contains recommendations endorsed by the Task Force members that are expected to have a material impact in reducing flight delays at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark. In keeping with the original mission of the Task Force as announced in July 2007, it focuses on methods of expanding available capacity in the New York metropolitan area. Accordingly, it does not adopt a position on demand management strategies for reducing flight delays – strategies, such as capacity limits and congestion pricing, as to which considerable disagreements exist among Task Force members. While there is serious and legitimate debate about the effectiveness and impacts of these proposals – debate that has been widely reported in various media – this report shows that the major stakeholders in the aviation system can and do agree on certain capacity expansion strategies for reducing flight delays. Having identified the capacity expansion strategies on which consensus exists, prudence suggests that the responsible stakeholders in the aviation system should implement them as soon as possible, even while disagreements as to other suggested approaches await resolution. flight delay task force report |  IntroductIon highlightS fROM the RepORt T HE TASK FORCE IDENTIFIED 77 technical initiatives that can improve capacity and reduce delays, as well as a number of recommendations to improve the travel experience for passengers in the event of a delay. The technical initiatives, in particular, can have a substantial impact on flight delays, even if they expand the aviation system’s capacity only incrementally. If, for example, all the technical recommendations together generated as few as six additional spaces for takeoffs or landings during peak periods at JFK, estimates suggest the airport could accomodate current demand with far fewer delays. Short Term: Managing Delays The Flight Delay Task Force members were able to identify 27 short-term initiatives that can improve delays by next summer. Most of these recommendations focus on the implementation of readily available technologies or modernizing outdated policies. Some key short-term measures include: • Install advanced ground surveillance systems, which would help ground controllers get a better understanding of where planes are on the tarmac. This helps move planes on and off taxiways and in and out of gates faster and more efficiently. • Open new routes in the most congested airspace. Airspace is structured along routes, akin to highways, but the system is not currently configured to accommodate the maximum possible traffic. By rearranging and adding to the available routes more planes will be able to use the airspace at any given moment without interfering with each other and causing delays. For example, offering dedicated space for heavily traveled routes like the one from the New York metropolitan area to Washington, DC could make room for other flights to use the rest of the routes in the airspace. Long Term: Expanding Capacity The remaining 50 recommendations deal with the fundamental physical capacity of airports, sophisticated technology that will require time and substantial investment to implement, and complex new policies and procedures. Some key long-term measures include: • Improve the configuration of the airports’ runways and taxiways, which would allow planes to move more quickly and efficiently on and off runways, improving arrival and departure speeds. The Port Authority’s 2008 budget already includes construction of taxiway additions that will improve access and departure capacity at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark. • Implement Area Navigation, or RNAV, an advanced technique of precise point-to-point navigation. Existing navigation technology can be slow and cumbersome requiring a pilot to continuously check back with air traffic controllers and wait for instruction. With RNAV, during departure, a pilot departs on a direct route to the correct altitude and coordinates, allowing planes to takeoff in quick succession. • Develop new procedures and technology to use multiple runways simultaneously. With these new tools, aircraft will be able to land on two runways, taking full advantage of the existing airport infrastructure to move more planes.  | flight delay task force report IntroductIon Customer Service: Improving the Customer Experience Passengers deserve a comfortable travel experience. Delays make this more difficult, but the Task Force members found that, working together, the airport operators and the airlines can do more to help. The recommendations focus on the critical needs of delayed passengers: understanding the situation so that they can make informed choices, finding amenities and services to help cope with delays, locating alternative transportation or accommodation in the event of extreme delays, and preventing situations where passengers are stranded on the tarmac for extended periods. Some key recommendations include: • Establish a baseline maximum time, two hours for departures and one hour for arrivals, for a plane to sit on the tarmac before the airlines must notify the Port Authority. Ensuring that the Port Authority is told when planes loaded with passengers are stuck on the ground will allow for the preparation of support services, like buses to get passengers off stranded planes and back to the terminal. The additional support will facilitate faster service to passengers and reduce the time passengers spend stuck on delayed aircraft. • Create an “early warning” system, which would allow passengers to avoid frustrating waits at the airport. For example, if customers had delay monitoring systems available to them in their hotels, they could wait out delays in the comfort of their rooms instead of at busy airport terminals, and leave only when they know their flight will be taking off. • Provide delayed passengers with information on alternate flights and ground transportation. During some delay conditions, travelers may be able to reach their destination faster by departing from another airport or by train. flight delay task force report |  overvIew of the technIcal recommendatIons  OVeRVieW Of the teChNiCal ReCOMMeNdatiONS: MaNagiNg delayS aNd eXpaNdiNg CapaCity T HE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP, comprised of representatives from the airline industry and officials from the FAA, the Port Authority, and state and local government, was charged with developing recommendations to improve efficient air traffic flow and overall on-time performance, while maintaining the highest level of safety. The Technical Working Group identified over 77 recommendations, which may be categorized broadly as procedural, technological, and capital in nature. • Procedural recommendations address modifications to air traffic control procedures -- the rules that govern runway occupancy, spacing between aircraft, flight routes, airspace navigation and the use of runways. Taken together, these recommendations can significantly improve the number of arrivals and departures, or “operations,” an airport is able to handle in an hour. • Technological recommendations focus on underutilized technologies, including satellite-based technologies, such as text-based communication and global positioning systems, which have extensive applications in other fields, but have not been widely adopted in the aviation context. Applying these technologies can provide more accurate information to pilots and controllers regarding air traffic conditions. The precision of these new technologies improves safety, and allows aircraft to use both ground and airspace more efficiently. • Capital recommendations deal with major construction projects that change the infrastructure of the airport to make it more accommodating to larger numbers of flights, more simultaneous operations, and bigger planes. These include additions and rehabilitations on taxiways and runways at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark, which would improve ground movement, overall operations at the airports and landings in poor weather, and should result in reduced aircraft spacing in the future. Many of the capital recommendations have already been incorporated into the Port Authority’s proposed 2008 Budget and updated Capital Plan. Implementing these recommendations will result in increased capacity - adding to the number of takeoffs and landings that can be handled per hour. This, in turn, will allow the currently overburdened aviation system to catch up with the demand for flights, decreasing the overcrowding of airspace, runways, and taxiways that contribute most directly to delays. Indeed, mathematical modeling shows that delays multiply exponentially as hours pass and the aviation system becomes more and more backed up. Therefore, incremental additions to the hourly takeoff and landing rates garner large improvements in the delay situation by preventing congestion from beginning in the first place. Simply put, small improvements in capacity bring large reductions in delays. With this in mind, the potential for real progress is substantial. If, for example, all 77 recommendations together generated as few as six additional spaces for takeoffs or landings during peak periods at JFK, some 3.5 million additional flyers would be able to travel through that airport without creating unacceptable delays. Current estimates suggest that there are some 3.4 million passengers at JFK above and beyond what the system can handle before it breaks down, causing delays greater than the 20-minute average targeted by the FAA. The addition of 3.5 million passengers worth of marginal capacity, then, would allow the airport to accommodate today’s demand, dramatically reducing delays at the airport to bring them into line with federal targets. In recognition of the importance of immediate improvement, the Task Force has identified 27 near-term items that could be implemented in Spring 2008, which should lead to fewer delays by Summer 2008.  | flight delay task force report overvIew of the technIcal recommendatIons Many of the recommendations identified by the Technical Working Group and endorsed by the Task Force are highly technical, referencing specific navigational routes and fixes used in aviation. In plain language, the procedural, technological and capital recommendations all point toward five simple objectives: improved ground movement of airplanes, better techniques for navigation, flight routes that respond to current air traffic demands, clearer communications between pilots and controllers, and improved departure and arrival capacity, which mean fewer delays, and an overall better and safer flying experience for passengers. The complete list of 77 items is included in Appendix A.2 The following are representative of the types of recommendations proposed by the Technical Working Group. Improve Ground Traffic Movement Improvements to ground movement enable aircraft to taxi more quickly and safely between runways and terminals. Among the technological recommendations is the implementation of advanced ground surveillance systems (recommendation #1) at all airports. These systems provide controllers with precise images mapping the location of every aircraft on the ground in real time as they move along ramps, gates, runways, and taxiways. The result will be fewer delays caused by ground traffic conflicts and congestion. Swift ground movement also relies on the availability of ramps and runways at the airport and the ability of pilots and air traffic controllers to navigate aircraft across the airfield without impeding ground vehicle and other aircraft traffic. The Technical Working Group identified eleven capital improvements to the configuration of the airports’ runways, taxiways, and systems (2, 58, 65-68 and 72-76). For example at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark, the Port Authority’s 2008 budget includes construction of taxiway additions that will improve access and provide enhanced departure queuing and resequencing capabilities. Other capital projects including providing staging areas at the airports that can be used for deicing, tactical ground support, or holding areas for aircraft. Develop Use of RNAV Among the procedural recommendations are thirteen items (5, 20, 24, 25, and 47-55) that enhance the use of Area Navigation, or RNAV, an advanced technique of precise point-to-point navigation. Many procedures and technologies used today do not allow aircraft to fly in a straight line from one point to another. For example, using existing technology, during takeoff a pilot needs to continuously check back with the control tower, wait for a response, and then adjust altitude and position until reaching cruising altitude. Switching to RNAV, allows for direct navigation, saving time and fuel and increasing safety. The pilot departs on a direct route to the correct altitude and coordinates, allowing planes to takeoff in quick succession – and relieving the air traffic controller of routine coordination. Quicker departures mean less congestion on the runway and fewer delays piling up at the airport. At Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, the implementation of RNAV has increased departures by 20% for American Airlines and improved overall capacity by 14%. Improve Flight Routes Like highways, the nation’s airspace is divided into routes, and many routes in the New York metropolitan area were devised in the 1960s. Of course, airspace inherently allows more flexibility in the configuration of these “highways” and the result of rearranging and adding to the available routes is that more planes will be able to fly along them. The Technical Working Group recommends several modifications and additions to existing flight routes that serve the region. A number are specifically focused on increasing departure capacity including: adding an alternate route for departing flights, 2 Each item is numbered with notes indicating the type of recommendation and its status. Short-term items could be implemented within 6 months, mid-term, between 6 and 18 months and long-term, more than 18 months. flight delay task force report |  overvIew of the technIcal recommendatIons enabling aircraft to avoid severe weather on the original flight path (4), adding a separate route to decongest regional traffic from the Washington D.C. area (5), and adding a westbound departure route north of J80 to reduce volume on the most used westbound route from New York/Philadelphia (10). In the New York metropolitan area, the proximity of our airports to one another causes conflicts between arriving and departing traffic. Therefore, a number of the recommendations focus on reducing the conflicts caused by older departure and arrival routes from JFK, Newark, LaGuardia and Teterboro (6, 20, 30, 50-52) -- rearranging the structure of how airplanes fly as they takeoff and land at each airport. The recommendations also include the expanded use of the Airspace Flow Program (3), an existing option used in severe weather that allows planes to fly around weather conditions by using a longer route. The program could be used to allow airlines the option of flying around air traffic congestion. This way more flights would be allowed to depart even when other parts of the airspace are congested. As some flights are cleared for departure the backlog of flights decreases creating a reverse “domino effect” of reducing delays. Implement New Technologies Technological upgrades promise to modernize air travel and provide significant capacity enhancements, particularly in their ability to improve communication and situational awareness among the participants in the aviation system. Many of the technologies on which the aviation industry currently relies are cumbersome involving voice technology and radar systems. Enhancing communication across the aviation system creates network linkages, allowing FAA controllers and airlines to communicate about conditions in real time. Data Link is one non-voice communication, analogous to text messaging, that would permit instantaneous communication between pilots and controllers (60). Another is developing a Net-Centric airport, which would network all airport users into a single system (56). Net-Centric technology is a tool for coordinating operations of the entire system enabling communication of airlines, airports, and the FAA to share and operate from a single source for all operational information including reroutes, and gate information. This would have an enormous beneficial impact on decision-making throughout the system. Reduce Excess Spacing As airplanes make their final approach, spacing is required between them and other arriving aircraft in order to ensure safety. One of the Technical Working Group’s findings is that spacing between aircraft has been steadily increasing beyond that needed for safety. At Newark and LaGuardia this means that the number of arrivals per hour has been correspondingly decreasing. This causes other scheduled arrivals to wait their turn to enter the queue and has far reaching effects on the aviation system. To address this issue the Task Force recommends adhering to established standards and conducting final compression studies to reduce excessive spacing between aircraft on their final approach (18), and establishing standard throughput rates (34). One technology that could prove particularly helpful in safely reducing the space between aircraft is Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). ADS-B is a satellite-based system that provides more precise surveillance capabilities (59). With ADS-B, both pilots and controllers see radar-like displays with highly accurate traffic data from satellites in real time. The system will also give pilots access to weather services, terrain maps and flight information services. When pilots and controllers know more precisely where all planes are relative to each other and other features of the aviation system like storms and mountains, they are able to fly with less separation, increasing predictability in departure and arrival times and improving the ability of air traffic controllers to plan arrivals and departures in advance. The result is material gain in safety, capacity and efficiency.  | flight delay task force report  overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons CUStOMeR SeRViCe ReCOMMeNdatiONS: iMpROViNg the CUStOMeR eXpeRieNCe T HE CUSTOMER SERVICE WORKING GROUP – composed of representatives from the airline industry, travel advocates, state and local officials and the Port Authority – focused on identifying ways to improve customer service in the event flight delays occur. Implementing the procedural, technological, and capital recommendations described in the previous section will beneficially impact the delay situation in the New York area. However, certain causes of flight delays – such as severe weather and technical malfunctions – are unavoidable. For this reason, it is incumbent upon the entire aviation community that we be honest about the problems travelers have, and come together to solve them. When a delay occurs, that inconvenience is too often only the beginning of a traveler’s troubles. Delayed flights ripple throughout the aviation system, disrupting the flow of others parts of operations and inhibiting the ability to serve customers effectively. As flight delays begin to pile up, airplanes get stuck at gates, stopping other planes from getting to the gate to allow passengers to disembark -- leaving passengers sitting on runways and taxiways. The aviation system’s communications apparatus becomes stressed -- making it difficult for travelers to get the information they need to make alternative plans. In extended delays, food, shelter, and other amenities can be slow to arrive -- making the already uncomfortable situation of being delayed even more troublesome. In the wake of repeated breakdowns in customer service, there have been several federal- and statelevel initiatives in the past year to enact “passengers’ bill of rights” requiring airlines to adopt uniform minimum customer service standards if flight delays occur. Task Force members agree there is a need to provide air travelers with better and more consistent customer service in the event of delays. However, a consensus-based approach, stressing communication with travelers and coordination among airlines, airports and the various service providers, is preferable to legislative mandates for at least two reasons. First, the airlines have adopted their own approaches and strategies for addressing customer needs during flight delays, and laws requiring uniform standards may stifle the freedom needed to develop innovative approaches. Second, the proposed laws focus almost exclusively on the airlines and fail to recognize that any effective approach requires coordination among all of the various service providers to airline passengers, including the Port Authority and terminal operators, concessionaires, as well as outreach to off-airport parties that can provide passengers with services and amenities during extended delays. The Working Group identified three main areas for improvement in current customer service practices: • Improve communications with passengers. Regular communication with passengers concerning the status of delays has a significant impact on improving the customer experience. Passengers in-flight and on the ground expect and deserve prompt information about the status and length of delays, and information about the resources available to them during delays. However, when delays occur, the focus of airlines and their partners on operational concerns often pushes customer communication to the background, and airlines have not employed communications resources and systems to the maximum degree possible. The Working Group identified new ways to utilize technological resources and existing systems to communicate information about delays to passengers. One initiative of the Working Group enables airport staff to provide severely delayed passengers with information on alternate means of reaching their destinations such as flight information at regional airports, or accessible ground transportation options like Amtrak for Northeast Corridor passengers. flight delay task force report |  overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons • Improve coordination among service providers. The various parties responsible for the experience of passengers at New York metropolitan area airports – including not only the airlines but also terminal operators and the Port Authority – have established their own programs designed to meet customer needs in the event of flight delays. Experience has shown, however, that these programs, standing in isolation, are at times inadequate to ensure that travelers are provided with appropriate levels of customer service. Moreover, airlines sometimes fail to take sufficient advantage of commonly available services and amenities at the New York area airports. Increasing coordination, to take one example, would allow airlines to take advantage of Port Authority vehicles and staff to quickly move passengers from aircraft on the tarmac back to the terminal when passengers are stranded by severe delays. • Improve planning and coordination with accommodation providers and transportation services in the event of extended delays. The need for improved customer services is especially acute for passengers stranded because their flights have been cancelled or delayed for extended periods of time. These travelers may require overnight accommodation and/or access to alternative modes of transportation to their intended destination. New initiatives would provide ready resources to identify hotel accommodations and transportation quickly for those customers who need them. The Customer Service Working Group has identified 19 recommendations that, taken together, address each of these three deficiencies. 3 Create and Implement a Communications Plan The Working Group formed a Communication subcommittee which is in the process of developing a discrete communications plan to improve information exchange to passengers. The communications plan will build on existing airport programs and provide new initiatives to improve the dissemination, availability and frequency of information on flights. However, it relies on airlines to be the direct link to their customers during delays, as noted in the action item below. • Airlines need to more actively communicate their own proprietary programs to their customers to ensure realistic passenger expectations during delay events on board aircraft or in the terminal. Airlines should ensure that each passenger understands existing airline customer service programs for delayed passengers, which are substantial, but frequently underutilized. Customers require a clearer explanation of what services they can expect to receive and how to reach out for them. Airlines on the Working Group have committed to work to improve communication of the existing programs to passengers. This will help to manage expectations and provide passengers with more information to make informed decisions during delays. In addition to this critical action item, the Working Group identified a number of additional new initiatives that its communications subcommittee is addressing, as follows: 3 While most of the recommendations received broad consensus from the Task Force members, there was dissent on certain actions described in the report. ATA, on behalf of its passenger member airlines, objected to the formation of any mandatory rules or procedures, which would require airline participation, because they may conflict with existing individual airline customer service standards and plans. In addition, Continental Airlines, while supporting implementation of the airfield conditions portion of the IROPSnet program, objects to the utilization of other portions of the IROPSnet system at Newark, since Continental currently utilizes a different system for slot allocation/deicing procedures during irregular operations. ATA, on behalf of its members, has also objected to a Port Authority customer survey on the basis that individual air carriers are currently collecting this information. 0 | flight delay task force report overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons • Focus on communications with passengers with reduced mobility, special needs and non-English speaking customers. Recognizing that some passengers have special needs and require additional services, the Working Group recommends that a specific communications tools for these passengers be developed and implemented during delays. All airport service providers must be able to communicate information on the status of delays to these passengers and provide special services promptly. For example, front line staff will be provided with information cards listing contact numbers of staff with foreign language skills. • Make maximum use of technology to effectively notify passengers of delay situations including websites, airport alerts and public service announcements. Communicating delays quickly and consistently to passengers is critical. However, the Port Authority and airlines are not currently using all available technologies to their fullest extent. The communication subcommittee is working on developing new ways of using these technologies to provide timely information on flight status to passengers prior to arriving at, en route to or at the airport. These technologies include using flight information alerts to cell phones that will allow customers to respond to delays in real time. • Create greater accessibility to flight information at other regional airports, or other information on ground transportation providers (e.g. Amtrak for Northeast corridor passengers), to allow more options to passengers. In certain delay conditions, passengers may be able to reach regional destinations more quickly through other airports or alternative transportation services. The airport can play a role in identifying these alternatives and providing the information to customers. This effort can also reduce delays caused by air traffic congestion and allow longer flights – flights to destinations that can only be reached by air - to utilize the additional air space. Passengers will be able to access this information with the assistance of staff at the airport through enhanced welcome centers and information kiosks. • Utilize other transportation properties, both Port Authority and regional, to create greater customer awareness of delays and other airport information. The Port Authority and other regional transportation agencies have facilities that many passengers travel through on their way to flights. These properties can be utilized to disseminate real time flight information to customers prior to arriving at the airport. For example, flight arrival and departure information monitors could be installed at Penn station to let travelers know as soon as possible whether their flights are delayed or if there are other conditions they should be aware of due to heavy travel volumes or weather. Providing travelers with early warnings in this manner would help them make alternate arrangements, while minimizing disruption and inconvenience. The subcommittee will work with other transit agencies to determine the feasibility of using their facilities for airport information. • Improve quality of announcements during delay situations. Improving the frequency, clarity, and information provided during delay situations – especially extended delays - may help travelers make arrangements to deal with their situation more effectively. Even where there is little the traveler can do, more and better information will help them understand their circumstances – easing, at least, the stress that accompanies confusion and misinformation. • Implement delayed passenger survey to understand customer expectations and needs during delays and use the results with partners to meet or reset these as necessary via communications. While airlines and the Port Authority currently conduct passenger surveys, the Port Authority will implement a delayed passenger survey that will provide specific information on flight delay task force report |  overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons the needs and experiences of delayed customers at Port Authority airports. This information will not be made public, but shared exclusively with the Port Authority and the relevant airline to improve communications with all airport customers and further develop existing Port Authority and airline service programs. • Airlines and the Port Authority should communicate the delay average for flights through various media so customers can make informed decisions. Flight delays have increased in the past year; however, the flights affected and length of delays varies considerably. Enhancing customer access to information about flight delays when they are making their travel arrangements can manage expectations as to the extent of delays they might expect, and provide customers with the ability to make informed decisions on alternate ways or times to travel. • Develop a public education campaign on factors that create delay situations, unpredictability and need for real time and timely decision-making on the part of the customer. Certain conditions, such as severe weather, can create unexpected and unavoidable delays. Increasing public education of how these situations may arise and how passengers may respond to them may relieve some frustration and stress among customers. An example of how to do this would be to have 60-second spots run on CNN in the gate areas explaining what affects and creates delay situations. Improve Coordination Of Existing Customer Service Programs And Expand Use Of Community-Wide Programs Existing customer service programs form the basis of a comprehensive airport-wide approach. The following items are existing services that will be enhanced to provide consistent services to all customers at Port Authority airports. • Institute a baseline threshold point for carrier notification to Port Authority on delay situations. At certain times, an airline may require assistance from the airport operator to provide services to delayed passengers, including the use of Port Authority vehicles to get passengers off of planes stuck on the tarmac. Currently the Port Authority provides customer service support upon request of the airline or terminal operator. There have been instances, however, when airlines did not request Port Authority support and passengers did not receive attention as quickly or immediately as they might have. The Working Group recommends that a baseline maximum be established for an airline to notify the Port Authority of a delay: two hours for departures and one hour for arrivals waiting for gates. This procedure would provide the Port Authority with information on extensive delays and allow Port Authority staff to prepare to provide any required support to airline services. For example, the agency could begin to ready buses in anticipation of a need to get stranded passengers off of planes and back to the terminals. The stranded passenger subcommittee is currently working on an implementation plan for this recommendation. • Enhance existing standards for assisting stranded passengers. The Customer Service Working Group is revising the current Port Authority standards for assisting stranded passengers to include airlines. For the most part, the airlines manage the customer service needs of their customers, but in extreme situations, it is useful to have a simple formula for action that applies universally across carriers. The Working Group has proposed that all airlines formally participate with the Port Authority Passenger Relief in Cooperation with the Airlines (PAPRICA) program. In the revised protocol airlines will notify the Port Authority when an aircraft has been delayed more than  | flight delay task force report overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons two hours from the scheduled departure time or when an arriving aircraft has been unable to reach the gate within one hour. When necessary, the Port Authority will then provide resources to the airline to recover passengers that have been stranded on aircraft and transport them to the terminal. • Establish an airport community subcommittee to examine functionality of IROPS (Irregular Operations Network) and the feasibility of implementing it across the airport system. The current IROPSnet system provides important airside, landside, terminal and regional information that is utilized primarily during snow events as a communications and collaborative realtime, decision-making tool. The IROPS subcommittee is examining the functionality of IROPSnet, along with other types of communication modules, and investigating the feasibility of developing additional uses to improve communications during extended delay conditions. The enhanced system could be shared among key airport constituents including: airlines, terminal operators, the Port Authority, federal agencies, and hotels to provide a more holistic view of what is happening at the airport during delays or otherwise. IROPSnet currently provides users with information such as: current airport conditions, tenant advisories, flight cancellations, and aircraft departure and arrival rates, so that services to customers can be adjusted accordingly. Some of the enhancements the subcommittee members are reviewing include: a visual ‘dashboard’ display of current airport conditions, alerts to ground delay of flights, automated emails of field conditions, automated access to roadway conditions and alternate transportation options. The IROPSnet subcommittee is analyzing expanding the use of the program to include regular operating conditions and the potential for implementation at Newark. • Utilize the Customer Care Councils to develop a Customer Care Delay Response training module for airport community supervisory staff. Trained professionals are critical to customer service, especially in high stress events such as delays. Ultimately, every passenger should be able to count on all airport community employees to be able to direct them to the information and services they need. In a large, diverse environment like an airport, however, ensuring this kind of uniform, comprehensive training is especially difficult. Building on existing training, the Working Group is developing a consistent delay response training module that will provide airport workers with specific information on topics such as: ways to assist customers during flight delays, communicating effectively with delayed passengers, identifying needs of delayed passengers like the location of airline service offices and baggage service offices. • Coordinate shared resources. Currently, airlines, terminal operators and the Port Authority have resources to serve the needs of passengers. However, the Customer Service Working Group has identified problems with coordination and sharing of these resources during extended delays. The Shared Resources subcommittee is developing new standards and protocols for shared resources with a focus on Port Authority resources such as blankets, cots, water, baby formula and diapers for passengers stranded at the airport terminal overnight or for extended periods of time. flight delay task force report |  overvIew of customer servIce recommendatIons Enhance Airport Accommodations and Transportation Planning For extended delays and flight cancellations, where passengers require overnight accommodations, it is especially important to provide prompt service. This involves identifying adequate rooms, and transportation to and from the airport. The following recommendations are intended to improve the ability of the airlines to provide these services. • Pool busing resources. Airlines, terminal operators and the Port Authority have access to a number of passenger vehicles that can transport stranded passengers to hotels and between airports as needed. The Working Group has begun work to identify available vehicles and develop procedures for their coordination during delays. It is anticipated that improved coordination will improve the speed and ability of airlines in transporting passengers. • Encourage all carriers to utilize a hotel consolidator and to include all major local hotel chains. Many airlines use hotel consolidators to improve identification of adequate accommodations for delayed passengers, although not across the system. Hotel consolidators purchase rooms in bulk and often have access to rooms at hotels that would otherwise be sold out. Securing the availability of a consolidator for all airlines that includes all major local hotel chains would offer the best source of information and network of resources to find the sufficient number and type of rooms to accommodate large numbers of passengers in a short period of time. • Work with hotel associations and local hotel operators to develop on-site check-in or flight awareness options through the use of technology. Customers’ travel experiences often start at the hotel they are departing from to get to the airport. Working with these hotels, the Accommodations and Transportation subcommittee advocates the development and use of on-site airline check-in services. This would improve the passenger experience by connecting customers directly to information on their travel plans and allow them to make choices whether to depart from the hotel and proceed to the airport. Ideally, these efforts would combine with the “early warning” communications tools above to allow travelers to learn of a delay before ever leaving their hotels, providing them with the opportunity to stay in the comfort of their rooms rather than leaving for the airport only to learn that their flight will not be taking off. • Work with hotel associations and local hotel operators to gain more information on room availability and ballroom availability for passenger staging in extreme situations. In case of an emergency situation, such as an event that would require suspension of airport operations, the airport community should have in-place an airport-wide plan to respond to the needs of large numbers of passengers in a short period of time. Therefore, the Task Force recommends identifying resources and locating accommodations in such an event, such as hotel rooms or large spaces that could be used to temporarily shelter passengers. • Create stronger coordination with the Taxi and Limousine Commission. Taxis are in high demand during severe delay conditions. The airport community will improve its coordination with New York City’s Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) in order to provide enhanced taxi services at certain times. Through a combined effort, the TLC and airport community should develop a plan to encourage more taxi drivers to serve the airport at these times.  | flight delay task force report  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons NeaR-teRM ReCOMMeNdatiONS Improve Ground Traffic Movement on the Airports 1. Install advanced ground surveillance systems to improve ground traffic management at JFK, Newark and LaGuardia. (Technological – pending) Advanced ground surveillance systems would improve the management of aircraft on the ground. These systems are designed to provide detailed coverage of movement on ramps, gates, runways, and taxiways and are scheduled for implementation in 2008 at Newark and JFK. The system being installed at JFK is an expansion of the original FAA design. It is also important to expand this system to Newark and LaGuardia to cover all ramps and taxiways and to include Data Distribution Units to allow greater access to the data stream. 2. Extend Taxiway B to the East at JFK. (Capital – pending) This would allow for greater use and flexibility on runway 22R and 31R. Increase Departure Capacity 3. Expand the use of the Airspace Flow Program in high volume conditions. (Procedural – pending) The Airspace Flow Program (AFP), implemented by the FAA to give airlines the option of flying longer routes to safely maneuver around storms, has successfully reduced delays. This program should also be utilized in high volume conditions to space en route aircraft, which would create gaps that would enable ground-delayed planes to depart more quickly. 4. Develop an additional route for severe weather. (Procedural – pending) An additional route should be created through Northgate utilizing Navigational Reference System waypoints to access the Canadian (CAN) Routes. 5. Develop a separate route for Washington DC area traffic from the New York and Philadelphia area using Area Navigation (RNAV). (Procedural – pending) An RNAV route for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) and Baltimore/Washington International Airport (BWI) traffic can segregate this traffic from the BIGGY route. This would reduce the current complexity of the routing system and reduce departure restrictions. 6. Develop new procedures at Newark to reduce conflicts with LaGuardia traffic. (Procedural – pending) At Newark Runway 4, procedures should be developed to create a climb off that would top LaGuardia arrivals when LaGuardia’s Runway 13 Instrument Landing System (ILS) is in use. This would reduce the current impact Runway 13 ILS has on Teterboro and Newark traffic. flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 7. Develop pre-coordinated tower reroutes. (Procedural – pending) Develop pre-coordinated reroutes for select high delay/priority flights staged in the departure queue. By providing routes that towers can implement without additional coordination (e.g. Severe Weather Avoidance Procedure (SWAP), Coded Departure Route’s (CDRs), and J75 Offloads) delays can be reduced and departure throughput increased. 8. Develop procedures during severe weather conditions that allow movement of unaffected flights. (Procedural – complete) During Severe Weather conditions, the NY Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY) has developed enhancements to its procedures (silent clearances) to permit controllers to launch aircraft without coordination with the Control Center, when specific routes are unaffected by weather. 9. Use route J70 as a westbound departure route under certain conditions. (Procedural – underway) Develop procedures with the NY Air Route Traffic Control Center that will allow for the use of route J70 (normally a Teterboro and JFK arrival route) for westbound departures when delays are exacerbated by weather. 10. Establish an additional westbound route north of route J80. (Procedural – in development) An additional westbound departure route north of route J80 would reduce volume on the most used westbound route from New York/Philadelphia. (This is tentatively planned for Spring 2008 and included as part of New York Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY) Sector 9 & 10 resectorization). 11. Accessing route J134/J149 from the navigational fix ELIOT. (Procedural – complete) This provides access to additional westbound routes from the New York/Philadelphia metropolitan area allowing for better fix balancing and reducing delays to access route J80. 12. Establish a new Ultra Hi sector at New York Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY). (Procedural – pending) A new Ultra Hi sector overlying sectors 9, 10 at ZNY would allow for an additional J80 route, improving capacity, and reducing complexity and controller workload. 13. Move Logan International Airport arrival route East, out of the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY) Sector 56. (Procedural – pending) This initiative would reduce complexity between arrivals and departures in Sector 56 at ZNY and improve departure throughput without impacting Logan Airport. 14. Shift overflights in New York Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY) Sector 34. (Procedural – pending) Shifting overflights would allow unrestricted climbs for New York departures, improving sector capacity by reducing aircraft interactions and complexity.  | flight delay task force report appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 15. Develop procedures to use route J146 for departures during Severe Weather Avoidance Procedures (SWAP). (Procedural – underway) Similar to the J70 initiative, this would use the LaGuardia arrival route for departures from New York and Philadelphia during certain severe weather conditions (for tactical use). 16. Develop procedures to utilize JFK Runway 31L departures with LaGuardia on Coney Climbs. (Procedural – pending) This would increase the use of Runway 31L at JFK and allow LaGuardia Coney climbs. Combined, the result would be improved departure throughput at both airports. Restrictions have been in place with slower climbing aircraft (B727), but newer aircraft can make these climb restrictions. 17. Expand the departure fixes allowed from the secondary departure runway at JFK. (Procedural – underway) Increased use of the alternate departure runway at JFK can be achieved by expanding available fixes. The use of this procedure with the White/Wavey Shuffle would provide increased flexibility in operations. Increase Arrival Capacity 18. Reduce excessive spacing between aircraft on final approach. (Procedural – pending) Spacing between flights on final approach is an important aspect of safety. Comparisons of recent rates to historic throughput show that spacing has been increasing over time. The result has been a decline in the number of operations. Consistently spacing aircraft at optimal distances by adhering to standards and conducting final compression studies would increase the number of arrivals per hour. 19. Develop procedures for the efficient use of visual approaches. (Procedural – pending) Visual approaches in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) should be used consistently to improve throughput. 20. Develop non-conflicting RNAV approach into the Downtown Manhattan Heliport (JRB). (Procedural – underway) During Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) weather, helicopters often fly using LaGuardia Instrument Landing System (ILS) until they clear the clouds, reducing airport capacity. An RNAV approach into the Heliport would resolve this and deconflict traffic. The FAA is currently working on Special Point in Space Procedure for a single operator. (This recommendation would be implemented as a special procedure, but needs to be developed as a public procedure.) 21. Allow simultaneous Instrument Landing System (ILS) at JFK. (Procedural–complete) This simultaneous use of Instrument Landing System (ILS) approaches on Runways 31L and 31R enhances arrival throughput. flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 22. Allow reduced spacing on crossing runway operations. (Procedural – underway) Implement a Runway 4R-29 Waiver at Newark. This procedure allows arrivals to Runway 29, while landing Runway 4R. Aircraft are spaced to ensure safety and operations are enhanced. The FAA approved the waiver, but more work is required prior to implementation. 23. Implement simultaneous visual approaches to Runway 4L at Newark. (Procedural – underway) Simultaneous Visual Approaches to runway 4L at Newark Liberty increases arrival capacity by allowing overflow arrivals to use runway 4L. This item has been implemented, but is still not being used consistently. 24. Establish an RNAV visual approach procedure to Newark Runway 29 to achieve a repeatable, stabilized approach path from the west, north and south. (Procedural – underway) This would allow for more consistent spacing and would improve the ability to use Runway 29 for landings while other aircraft are landing at runway 4R or 22L. Development work is underway on this recommendation through N90 and the FAA RNAV office. 25. Develop RNAV Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STAR) from the navigational fixes SHAFF/PHLBO to Runway 11 at Newark. (Procedural – pending) This would segregate Runway 11 arrivals from other Newark Liberty traffic and make them easily identifiable to air traffic controllers. More Efficient Airspace Utilization 26. Accelerate New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia Airspace Redesign Implementation (Phase 1 and 2). (Procedural–underway) Begin expedited funding of the New York Airspace Redesign Program. Deliver short-term items immediately including Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) Near-Term Initiatives and begin to plan implementation of the entire program. Improve Information to Fixes 27. Eliminate pass-back restrictions to New York area airports for destinations 500 miles or more, which can increase the number of departures. (Procedural – underway) Pass-back restrictions to airports over 500 miles lead to wasted space in the departure queue because controllers wait to release aircraft for take-off. Eliminating these restrictions and allowing en route controllers to build in the spacing would improve airport efficiency. This recommendation has been implemented for airports greater than 700 miles and the FAA is working on the requirements to shorten the distance to 500 miles, which includes airports like Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International and Chicago O’Hare Airport.  | flight delay task force report appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 28. Develop conditional holding patterns. (Procedural – pending) Develop procedures to allow New York Tracon to work conditional holding patterns at Yardley, Robbinsville, and Camrn. This would allow the Tracon to empty the pattern quickly and immediately when traffic conditions permit, thus reducing coordination and delays. 29. Refine and develop the Route Availability Planning Tool (RAPT) to improve route planning around severe weather. (Technological – underway) RAPT is currently used to plan routes around locations with severe weather conditions. Improvements to the predictability capabilities of this system can reduce delays along affected routes. This item has been included in the FAA budget for implementation. 30. Deconflict Newark Liberty arrivals via the navigational fix SHAFF. (Procedural – complete) Part of the Airspace Redesign Program initiatives, this recommendations would allow for higher arrival altitudes for international traffic from the north during low demand times over SHAFF (12am-6am time dependent). 31. Re-route Caribbean arrivals. (Procedural – complete) In order to better control Newark’s final approach, Caribbean Tactical Reroutes help to manage Newark Arrival Banks, while landing Runway 4R (a tactical operation). flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons Mid-teRM ReCOMMeNdatiONS Airspace Initiatives 32. Implement simultaneous departure runways at Newark and JFK daily. (Procedural – pending) Utilize multiple runways to depart traffic simultaneously resulting in improved throughput. In order to be successful, these procedures must be used consistently. 33. Reclassify the B757s to adjust to appropriate spacing requirements. (Procedural – pending) Currently the B757-300 and other B757 that have a Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW) of 255,000 lbs are classified as heavy-jets. There should be a specific classification for all B757 aircraft. Changing the standard would reduce spacing requirements between certain B757 aircraft and improve capacity with minimal cost. 34. Develop standard throughput rates. (Procedural – pending) Current throughput rates are subjective. A consistent set of standards for throughput rates based on weather and actual aircraft types would improve capacity. 35. Evaluate control tower staffing levels. (Procedural – pending) Conduct a control tower staffing analysis to determine if additional staff would improve operational capabilities and increase efficiency. 36. Develop a Controller Based Safety Program. (Procedural – pending) Develop a controller program, similar to airline safety programs that would allow controllers to identify safety issues without fear of reprimand. In order to improve safety, the FAA should identify ways to improve the system without punishing controllers for inadvertent errors. 37. Eliminate miles-in-trail (MIT) restrictions when Expected Departure Clearance Time (EDCTs) is in place. (Procedural – pending) Currently aircraft involved in an EDCT program, often suffer additional delays while they wait for a gap in the overhead stream to meet miles-in-trail (MIT) spacing requirements. Eliminating this requirement for aircraft with an EDCT would improve the airport throughput and reduce excessive delays for arrivals. 38. Resector positions in New York Air Route Traffic Control Center to segregate arrival and departure flows. (Procedural – pending) Hyper-Binns resectorization is recommended to reduce complexity and improve capacity. 0 | flight delay task force report appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 39. Stack departure fixes to expedite departures. (Procedural – pending) Stacking departures would allow for piggyback departure altitudes at outbound fixes rather than requiring traffic to be in-trail. This would expedite traffic and improve capacity. 40. Redesign New York Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZNY) sectors 27, 73, 91, 93. (Procedural – pending) This initiative would improve throughput by reducing complexity and segregating arrival and departure positions. It would not require any additional sectors. 41. Advance Random Routes East program to reduce international departure delays. (Procedural–pending) Similar to a procedure for westbound traffic, agreements need to be established with international air traffic service providers to allow random routes in the eastbound direction to segregate traffic and reduce departure restrictions. FAA is working with NAV Canada and discussions are ongoing with international service providers 42. Develop JFK Runway 13R arrivals and Runway 22R departures waiver. (Procedural–underway) Allow departures from Runway 22R at JFK while arrivals land at Runway 13R, in order to reduce the separation required between operations to realistic levels and maintain safety. 43. Develop Converging Runway Display Aid (CRDA) procedures at Newark. (Procedural–pending) For use in visual conditions for Runway 11/22 and 4/11 (with no land and hold short restrictions) 44. Develop procedures for visual approaches at Newark. (Procedural–pending) Develop visual approaches to Runway 22L with tower sidestep to Runway 22R in visual conditions. This procedure is similar to RNAV to Runway 22R and eliminates VFR Ground Delay Program (GDP). Improving Capacity in Severe Weather Conditions 45. Develop an initiative with the National Weather Service to improve convective forecasting. (Procedural–pending) The Collaborative Convection Forecast Product (CCFP) initiative could provide greater granularity on weather conditions. Improved forecasting of weather conditions would result in improved flight planning and reduce weather related delays. 46. Segregate departures by fix. (Procedural–pending) To the extent practical, through remote staging, develop intersection departure procedures segregate departures by planned departure fix to facilitate severe weather operations. This would facilitate Severe Weather Avoidance Procedures (SWAP) departures. A potential limitation of this flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons recommendation is that it requires areas to hold aircraft with access to runways, some of which would need to be constructed. Area Navigation (RNAV) Development 47. Using RNAV would add a 3rd Northgate route. (Procedural – pending) Adding an additional route would allow controllers to segregate Miles–in-Trail (MIT) constrained routes such as O’Hare International (ORD) and Detroit Metro Airport (DTW) traffic and allow other unrestricted destinations to flow freely on existing routes. 48. Develop RNAV route for Washington - Dulles International (IAD) arrivals from Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZBW) to segregate Parke departures. (Procedural – pending) Similar to above, this would segregate arrivals from departures on the same route and improve throughput. 49. Add an RNAV waypoint west and north of navigational fix WANES to facilitate use of VHF Omni Directional Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) A approach to Teterboro. (Procedural – pending) Utilize a complete RNAV Visual or RNAV approach with descent guidance to improve use and consistency of VOR/DME A approach to Teterboro and deconflict arrivals with Newark traffic. 50. In order to deconflict with Newark traffic, develop procedures to consistently utilize RNAV Runway 6 at Teterboro. (Procedural – pending) This allows Newark and Teterboro to operate independently. While the current procedures allow limited use of this approach, these procedures should be developed to achieve more consistent use of the RNAV 6 approach to Teterboro. 51. In order to deconflict Teterboro & Morristown Municipal Airport flights from Newark traffic, develop additional RNAV designs and procedures at Teterboro. (Procedural – pending) 52. In order to deconflict traffic flows and reduce noise impacts, develop RNAV “transitions” or Charted Visual Flight Procedures (CVFP) at Teterboro. (Procedural – pending) 53. Develop RNAV transition to LOC 31 approach or overlay current vector pattern for the LOC 31 approach with RNAV waypoints at LaGuardia. (Procedural – pending) This would reduce controller complexity and improve final approach path consistency would improve airport throughput.  | flight delay task force report appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 54. Develop RNAV Departure Procedure from Newark Runway 22 to the navigational fixes, LANNA, PARKE and BIGGY to facilitate departures at LaGuardia. (Procedural – pending) This modification would reduce the workload for air traffic controllers. 55. Develop RNAV/Charted Visual to Runway 22R to eliminate use of VFR Ground Delay Program (GDP) at Newark. (Procedural – pending) Allow some overflow arrivals to Runway 22R and reduce controller workload which would decrease the need for ground delays programs in good weather. Develop Technology 56. Develop Net-Centric airport to all airport users to share data on a single system. (Technological—pending) A Net-centric airport would allow all users, airports, and the FAA to share and operate from a single source for all operational information on reroutes, gate information, ready status, etc. and would greatly improve the flow and availability of data and subsequent decision-making. 57. Accelerate Local Area Augmentation System/ground based augmentation system (LAAS/GBAS) Precision Landing System. (Technological — pending) This Next-Gen satellite based precision landing system is in the final stages of FAA certification and should be installed as soon as possible at Newark and Teterboro to provide additional precision approach capability. A single unit can serve multiple runways with multiple complex precision (curved or segmented) approaches with variable glide paths. . Consider uncoupling Runway 4R and Runway 29 at Newark. (Capital – pending) The intersection of these two runways reduces airport capacity and increases the possibility of runway incursions. A study should be conducted to determine if it is possible to uncouple the runways, thereby increasing airport capacity, without significantly reducing available takeoff or landing lengths. Next-Gen Technologies 59. Utilize ADS-B satellite based technology to improve traffic flow and reduce spacing between aircraft. (Technological — pending) ADS-B, Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, is a satellite-based system that provides more precise surveillance. The system improves traffic flows and has the ability to allow for reduced spacing and improvements in safety, capacity, and efficiency. With ADS-B, controllers see radar-like displays with highly accurate traffic data from satellites in real time. It allows for greater predictability in departure and arrival times and improves the ability of air traffic controllers to plan arrivals and departures far in advance. flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 60. Implement Digital non-voice communication, data link. (Technological — pending) Digital non-voice communication similar to text messaging could improve ease and speed of communication between pilots and controllers. 61. Develop 4-D flight tracks to improve traffic flows and runway sequencing. (Technological — pending) This recommendation includes an expansion of existing Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) program to additional airports/runways. It would enhance data sharing, reduce delays and improve throughput. 62. Utilize ground surveillance systems to improve operations both in air and on ground. (Technological — pending) Install terminal multilateration capability/leverage investment in ASDE-X and related ground surface management systems to provide high update surveillance capability in advance of ADSB mandate. New procedures should be designed to take advantage of improved surveillance capability.  | flight delay task force report appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons lONg-teRM ReCOMMeNdatiONS 63. Develop Runway 31L and Runway 22L Converging Runway Display Aid (CRDA) procedures at JFK. (Procedural – pending) This allows for multiple arrival runways and 4-runway concept. 64. Develop procedures to utilize JFK Runway 31R and Runway 22L arrivals via Converging Runway Display Aid (CRDA). (Procedural – pending) Allow simultaneous arrivals on crossing runways with the use of CRDA procedures. Before implementation, this recommendation requires wake turbulence analysis. 65. Make taxiway improvements at LaGuardia. (Capital – pending) Improvements to the taxiways and increases to the airside acreage would provide the ability to stage and store aircraft. 66. Add multiple access points to runway ends at JFK, Newark and LaGuardia. (Capital – pending) This would provide additional options for flow and sequencing of departing aircrafts taxiing to the runway. Dallas Fort Worth International Airport has similar access points that have proven to speed departures. 67. Provide an aircraft-holding pad at JFK. (Capital–planned construction 2010) The holding pad would be located at the end of taxiway P & Q near JFK Runway 13R and would be added to the 13R runway rehabilitation project. 68. Construct additional airside pavement at JFK. (Capital –pending) The additional paving could be used for de-icing and holding departure aircraft during Severe Weather Avoidance Procedures (SWAP) at the Hangar 12 site. This recommendation would provide additional space for aircraft tactical ground support and free up taxiway space for moving aircraft. Further, it would allow airlines to access aircraft in order to provide services in the event of extensive delays. 69. Utilize new precise navigation systems to reduce spacing. (Procedural–pending) Develop RNAV, Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Procedures to reduce spacing requirements utilizing instrument approach procedures such as Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs), and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs). 70. Provide data link real-time weather data and forecast to cockpit. (Technological–pending) This text-based real time messaging system would improve the pilots’ awareness of weather conditions. With a data link system, both pilots and controllers have information readily available reducing workloads. flight delay task force report |  appendIx a - technIcal workIng group recommendatIons 71. Develop procedures for parallel approaches at Newark. (Technological – pending) Existing procedures such as Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) (ADS-B/Multi-Lateration)/ Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA) or Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Parallel Approach Transition (RPAT) type should be applied to Newark Liberty runway 4L/R and runway 22L/R for use in Marginal Visual Meteorological Conditions (MVMC). This would allow for landing on parallel runways in less than visual conditions. 72. Deploy Air Traffic Control Tower simulators to Newark, JFK and LaGuardia. (Capital – pending) This would enhance Air Traffic Controller Training and allow tower staff to reduce the training time and improve safety for new controllers. 73. Evaluate obstacles that are impacting runways at Newark 29 take-off weights and develop a plan to remove them. (Capital – pending) 74. Evaluate obstacles impacting LaGuardia Runway 13 take-off weights and develop plan for removal. (Capital – pending) 75. Conduct a feasibility study on the installation specialized lighting systems at Newark. (Capital – pending) Examine whether a new lighting system, such as Omni-Directional Approach Lighting System (ODALS) for Runway 11 would have a demonstrable impact on capacity. 76. Install Dual Mode High Intensity Approach Lighting System ALSF-2 at Runway 22 at LaGuardia. (Capital – pending) Dual Mode High Intensity Approach Lighting System provides visual approach lighting patterns for landing aircrafts. This lighting system would enable the use of a Category II approach to Runway 22. 77. Develop closely spaced Dependent ILS Approaches at Newark. (Procedural – pending) Develop procedures (like STL) for use in certain weather conditions to reduce spacing and increase throughput (e.g. 15 knot crosswind with heavy jet outside and 1.5 nm diagonal separations behind aircraft of like types or smaller.)  | flight delay task force report technIcal workIng group members Debbie Bearden, New York Airport Liaison Office Joe Bertapelle, JetBlue Airways Lorne Cass, Northwest Airlines Jim Caudle, Southwest Airlines Peter Cerda, International Air Transport Association Mike Cirillo, Federal Aviation Administration Patty Clark, Port Authority of NY & NJ Perry Clausen, Southwest Airlines Jim Coyne, National Air Transportation Association Bill Cranor, International Air Transport Association John Dermody, Federal Aviation Administration Dan Doggendorf, Continental Airlines Ed Faberman, Air Carrier Association of America Bill Flanagan, Federal Aviation Administration Scott Foose, Regional Airline Association Carmine Gallo, Federal Aviation Administration Al Graser, Port Authority of NY & NJ Ron Haggerty, United Airlines Zach Hollander, Empire State Development Corp Mark Hopkins, Delta Airlines George Ingram, Air Transport Association Rick Klarmann, Continental Airlines Joe Kolshak, Delta Airlines Warren Kroeppel, Port Authority of NY & NJ George Kypreos, American Airlines Robert Lamond, National Business Aviation Association Kate Lang, Federal Aviation Administration Paul McGraw, Air Transport Association Glenn Morse, Continental Airlines Phil Mullis, Air Tran Airways Bill Murphy, US Airways Les Parson, Continental Airlines Jon Roitman, Continental Airlines Seth Rosan, New York State Department of Transportation Mike Sammartino, Federal Aviation Administration Eleanor Schifflin, Federal Aviation Administration Hannah Shostack, New Jersey Department of Transportation Dean Snell, National Business Aviation Association Tim Stull, UPS Airlines David Thomas, Lufthansa flight delay task force report |  customer servce workIng group members IROPSnet Subcommittee Chair: Bill Huisman, Aviation Development Council Debbie Bearden, NY Airlines Liaison Office Ron Dunsky, Passur Rich Halik, Port Authority Rick Hoefling, Continental Airlines Robert McAdams, AirTran David Lombard, American Airlines Frank Loprano, Port Authority Chris Painter, American Airlines Gerry Schwarz, Delta Airlines Doug Stearns, Port Authority Marisa von Wieding, JetBlue Community Accommodations & Transportation Subcommittee Chair: Jon Clark, Port Authority Pat Bonny, Port Authority Stephen DiTomasso, Port Authority Mike Holt, Continental Airlines Patty Ornst, NYC Economic Development Corporation Rossi Thomas, Continental Airlines Frank Tuzio, Port Authority Delay Training Program Subcommittee Chair: Maggi Villane, Port Authority Cheryl Lee, Port Authority Mary Murphy, Continental Airlines Valerie Pratt, Port Authority Robbyn Stewart, Port Authority Communications Subcommittee Chair: John Olberding, Port Authority Debbie Bearden, NY Airlines Liaison Office Stew Cutler, Port Authority Melba Davis, Port Authority Jeff Dean, Continental Airlines Stephen DiTomasso, Port Authority Gerardo Mendoza, New York State Department of Transportation Kelley Moore, Delta Airlines Jason Ward, JetBlue Stranded Passenger Services Subcommittee Chair: Maggi Villane, Port Authority Debbie Bearden, NY Airlines Liaison Office Stew Cutler, Port Authority John Depp, Continental Airlines Dan Doggendorf, Continental Airlines Sean Porter, Port Authority Doug Stearns, Port Authority Shared Resources Subcommittee Co-Chairs: Susan Bush, Port Authority Vincent Vesce, Port Authority Debbie Bearden, NY Airlines Liaison Office Ronnie Bendernagel, Port Authority Jackie Reis-Otero, Continental Airlines Chris Rhoads, Port Authority MJ Rutigliano, Port Authority  | flight delay task force report