Next Generation Air Transportation System
Preliminary Analysis of the Joint Planning and Development Office's Planning, Progress, and Challenges Gao ID: GAO-06-574T March 29, 2006The health of our nation's air transportation system is critical to our citizens and economy. However, the current approach to managing air transportation is becoming increasingly inefficient and operationally obsolete. In 2003, Congress created the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) to coordinate the federal and nonfederal stakeholders necessary to plan and implement a transition from the current air transportation system to the "next generation air transportation system" (NGATS). JPDO, although housed within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), has seven partner agencies: the Departments of Transportation, Commerce, Defense, and Homeland Security; FAA; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. This testimony provides preliminary results from GAO's ongoing study of the status of JPDO's efforts. GAO provides information on (1) the extent to which JPDO is facilitating the federal interagency collaboration and aligning the human and financial resources needed to plan and implement the NGATS, (2) the actions taken by JPDO to adequately involve stakeholders in the planning process, and (3) the extent to which JPDO is conducting the technical planning needed to develop the NGATS.
JPDO is implementing a number of practices that GAO's work has shown facilitates collaboration among federal agencies, but faces a challenge in sustaining this collaboration over the longer term. These practices include defining and articulating a common outcome, establishing mutually reinforcing or joint strategies to achieve that outcome, and identifying and addressing needs by leveraging resources among partner agencies. However, JPDO faces a challenge in leveraging resources because it is fundamentally a planning and coordinating body that lacks authority over the key human and financial resources needed to continue developing plans and system requirements for the NGATS. To its credit, JPDO is working with its partner agencies to align their fiscal year 2008 budget requests to support NGATS and is working with the Office of Management and Budget to develop a budget review process that easily identifies partner agencies' NGATS-related programs. JPDO has involved federal and nonfederal stakeholders throughout its organization. Federal stakeholders from the partner agencies work with JPDO throughout multiple levels of the organization. The NGATS Institute has been established as the mechanism for involving nonfederal stakeholders. The Institute has obtained participation from industry and other nonfederal stakeholders and has assigned them to work with JPDO. However, JPDO has experienced difficulties with soliciting the participation of current air traffic controllers, who will play a key role in the NGATS. Additionally, JPDO could face a challenge in sustaining nonfederal stakeholders' participation in an effort where tangible benefits may not be realized until several years in the future. JPDO is using an iterative technical planning process that appears to be reasonable in light of the NGATS complexity. The process includes iterative modeling--a technique that mathematically represents the NGATS' system performance parameters, demand, and economic factors--to narrow the range of potential options. This fall, JPDO plans to have an initial version of its enterprise architecture--a blueprint to guide NGATS development--and will refine the architecture as the NGATS effort moves forward.
GAO-06-574T, Next Generation Air Transportation System: Preliminary Analysis of the Joint Planning and Development Office's Planning, Progress, and Challenges
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-574T
entitled 'Next Generation Air Transportation System: Preliminary
Analysis of the Joint Planning and Development Office's Planning,
Progress, and Challenges' which was released on March 29, 2006.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Testimony:
Before the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
For Release on Delivery Expected at 2:00 p.m. EST:
Wednesday, March 29, 2006:
Next Generation Air Transportation System:
Preliminary Analysis of the Joint Planning and Development Office's
Planning, Progress, and Challenges:
Statement of Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.:
Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues:
GAO-06-574T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-06-574T, testimony before the Subcommittee on Space
and Aeronautics, Committee on Science, House of Representatives:
Why GAO Did This Study:
The health of our nation‘s air transportation system is critical to our
citizens and economy. However, the current approach to managing air
transportation is becoming increasingly inefficient and operationally
obsolete. In 2003, Congress created the Joint Planning and Development
Office (JPDO) to coordinate the federal and nonfederal stakeholders
necessary to plan and implement a transition from the current air
transportation system to the ’next generation air transportation
system“ (NGATS). JPDO, although housed within the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), has seven partner agencies: the Departments of
Transportation, Commerce, Defense, and Homeland Security; FAA; the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy. This testimony provides
preliminary results from GAO‘s ongoing study of the status of JPDO‘s
efforts. GAO provides information on (1) the extent to which JPDO is
facilitating the federal interagency collaboration and aligning the
human and financial resources needed to plan and implement the NGATS,
(2) the actions taken by JPDO to adequately involve stakeholders in the
planning process, and (3) the extent to which JPDO is conducting the
technical planning needed to develop the NGATS.
What GAO Found:
JPDO is implementing a number of practices that GAO‘s work has shown
facilitates collaboration among federal agencies, but faces a challenge
in sustaining this collaboration over the longer term. These practices
include defining and articulating a common outcome, establishing
mutually reinforcing or joint strategies to achieve that outcome, and
identifying and addressing needs by leveraging resources among partner
agencies. However, JPDO faces a challenge in leveraging resources
because it is fundamentally a planning and coordinating body that lacks
authority over the key human and financial resources needed to continue
developing plans and system requirements for the NGATS. To its credit,
JPDO is working with its partner agencies to align their fiscal year
2008 budget requests to support NGATS and is working with the Office of
Management and Budget to develop a budget review process that easily
identifies partner agencies‘ NGATS-related programs.
JPDO has involved federal and nonfederal stakeholders throughout its
organization. Federal stakeholders from the partner agencies work with
JPDO throughout multiple levels of the organization. The NGATS
Institute has been established as the mechanism for involving
nonfederal stakeholders. The Institute has obtained participation from
industry and other nonfederal stakeholders and has assigned them to
work with JPDO. However, JPDO has experienced difficulties with
soliciting the participation of current air traffic controllers, who
will play a key role in the NGATS. Additionally, JPDO could face a
challenge in sustaining nonfederal stakeholders‘ participation in an
effort where tangible benefits may not be realized until several years
in the future.
JPDO is using an iterative technical planning process that appears to
be reasonable in light of the NGATS‘ complexity. The process includes
iterative modeling”a technique that mathematically represents the
NGATS‘ system performance parameters, demand, and economic factors”to
narrow the range of potential options. This fall, JPDO plans to have an
initial version of its enterprise architecture”a blueprint to guide
NGATS development”and will refine the architecture as the NGATS effort
moves forward.
Seven Partner Agencies Form the Joint Planning and Development Office:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-574T.
To view the full product, click on the link above. For more
information, contact Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham, at (202) 512-2834 or
dillinghamg@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We appreciate the opportunity to participate in today's hearing to
discuss the status of the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO)
after its first 2 years of existence. The health of our nation's air
transportation system is critical to our citizens and economy. However,
the current approach to managing air transportation is becoming
increasingly inefficient and operationally obsolete. In November 2002,
the congressionally chartered Commission on the Future of the United
States Aerospace Industry recommended transforming the U.S. air
transportation system as a national priority.[Footnote 1] Transforming
the system to accommodate what is expected to be three times the
current amount of traffic by 2025, providing adequate security and
environmental safeguards, and doing these things seamlessly while the
current system continues to operate, will be an enormously complex
undertaking.
In 2003, Congress passed the Vision 100 -Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act, which created JPDO within the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to manage work related to the creation of a "next
generation air transportation system" (NGATS). JPDO has responsibility
for coordinating the research efforts of its partner agencies--the
Departments of Transportation (DOT), Commerce (DOC), Defense (DOD), and
Homeland Security (DHS); FAA; and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA). JPDO is also working with its final partner
agency--the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy--to
coordinate funding with the Office of Management and Budget.
Additionally, JPDO has responsibility to consult with the public; to
coordinate federal goals, priorities, and programs with those of
aviation and aeronautical firms; and to ensure the participation of
stakeholders from the private sector, including commercial and general
aviation, labor, aviation research and development entities, and
manufacturers. JPDO is jointly funded through FAA and NASA. The JPDO
Director reports to the FAA Administrator and to the Chief Operating
Officer of FAA's Air Traffic Organization.[Footnote 2]
Vision 100 directed JPDO to develop an integrated plan for the NGATS
and to include in the plan, among other things, a vision statement for
an air transportation system that meets potential air traffic demand by
2025; a description of the demand and required performance
characteristics of the future system; and a high-level, multi-agency
roadmap and concept of operations for the future system. Key tenets of
the plan are transitioning from the current largely ground-based
navigation system to one that is more focused on aircraft and satellite-
based navigation, and automating many of the routine air traffic
control functions. In addition, the integrated plan discusses a
strategy to harmonize the NGATS with equipage and operations around the
world to enhance safety and efficiency on a global scale. As directed
by Vision 100, the FAA Administrator provided this integrated plan to
Congress in December 2004 and issued the first annual progress report
earlier this month.
My statement today provides preliminary results from our ongoing study
of the status of JPDO and focuses on three specific questions. (1) To
what extent is JPDO facilitating the federal interagency collaboration
and aligning the human and financial resources needed to define and
perform the centralized planning function for the detailed
implementation of the NGATS? (2) What actions or initiatives has JPDO
implemented to ensure adequate involvement of stakeholders in the
planning process? (3) To what extent is JPDO conducting the technical
planning needed to develop the NGATS? My statement is based on our
analysis of documents provided by JPDO and its partner agencies; the
perspectives of agency officials and stakeholders with whom we have
spoken; the results of a panel of experts that we convened earlier this
month; and our review of relevant literature, including the integrated
plan and the progress report. We also draw upon our prior work on FAA's
national airspace system modernization program, which we have listed as
a high-risk program since 1995. To assess JPDO's prospects for
facilitating collaboration among its partner agencies, we compared its
practices to those that we have found to be effective in facilitating
other federal interagency collaborative efforts.[Footnote 3] We also
reviewed the National Research Council's 2005 report on JPDO, which
provided a technical assessment of the research, development, and
technology components of JPDO's integrated plan.[Footnote 4] In
addition, we reviewed relevant documents and interviewed officials and
stakeholders regarding Europe's effort to harmonize and modernize its
air traffic management system. Later this year, we expect to issue a
detailed report that will provide our assessment of the status of
JPDO's efforts as it works to develop the NGATS. We are performing our
work in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards.
In summary:
* JPDO is implementing a number of practices that our work has shown
facilitates collaboration among federal agencies, but faces a challenge
in maintaining this collaboration over the long term. These practices
include defining and articulating a common outcome, establishing
mutually reinforcing or joint strategies to achieve that outcome, and
identifying and addressing needs by leveraging resources among partner
agencies. JPDO's legislation established a common outcome--a
transformed national airspace system by 2025--that JPDO expanded on in
its integrated plan, which establishes an overarching framework and
goals for its activities. The plan also laid out eight joint strategies
for partner agencies to use as they help develop the NGATS.
Additionally, JPDO is leveraging partner agency resources by staffing
its organization with employees of the partner agencies, many of whom
work for JPDO as a collateral duty. JPDO has also reviewed these
agencies' research and development programs to identify work that could
support the NGATS. By using these practices for facilitating
collaboration, JPDO has gotten off to a positive start. However,
because JPDO is fundamentally a planning and coordinating body, it does
not have authority over the partner agencies' human and financial
resources that it needs to continue performing the centralized,
interagency planning function for detailed implementation of the NGATS.
Consequently, leveraging resources will continue to be critical to
JPDO's success, particularly in future years as partner agencies begin
to implement projects on a larger scale. JPDO was successful in
prompting FAA to request funding to accelerate system development for
two key NGATS systems in its fiscal year 2007 budget request. However,
JPDO officials told us that, while FAA did receive an increase, it did
not receive the full amount requested in the budget formulation
documents submitted to the Office of Management and Budget. Our work on
FAA's current air traffic control modernization program has shown that
receiving fewer resources than planned was a contributing factor in
schedule delays and subsequent cost increases. To its credit, JPDO is
working with its partner agencies to align their fiscal year 2008
budget requests to support the NGATS. JPDO has also opened a dialog
with the Office of Management and Budget to develop a systematic means
of reviewing partner agency budget requests so that NGATS-related
programs can be easily identified.
JPDO has incorporated representatives from federal and nonfederal
stakeholders throughout its organization. Federal stakeholders from the
partner agencies work with JPDO throughout multiple levels of the
organization. The NGATS Institute was created as the mechanism for
involving nonfederal stakeholders and has obtained their participation
and assigned them to work with JPDO's federal stakeholders. The NGATS
Institute Management Council, composed of top officials and
representatives from the aviation community, provides a means for
advancing consensus positions on critical NGATS issues. However, a
critical stakeholder in the nation's air traffic control system has yet
to become an active participant in this forum. Air traffic controllers,
who work in the current system and will play a key role in the NGATS,
have not been involved in JPDO's efforts. In the past, FAA's failure to
adequately involve air traffic controllers in its acquisition of new
technologies, such as the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement
System--a workstation for air traffic controllers--contributed to
costly rework and schedule delays. A challenge for JPDO could be
sustaining nonfederal stakeholders' participation in an effort where
tangible benefits may not be realized until several years in the
future. JPDO also faces the challenge of convincing nonfederal
stakeholders that the government is financially committed to the NGATS.
Additionally, JPDO could face a challenge in resolving the divergent
perspectives that are represented by its nonfederal stakeholders.
JPDO is using an iterative process to address the technical planning
needed to develop the NGATS that appears reasonable in light of the
system's complexity. The office has assembled a suite of models to
iteratively analyze and understand the interactions among system
performance parameters, demand, and economic factors, and has developed
an enterprise architecture, or "blueprint," for the NGATS. JPDO is
testing the adequacy of its suite of models, publishing the results,
and seeking peer review opportunities. However, these modeling efforts,
including those addressing human factors, are currently in the early
stages, and more time and field testing will be needed to increase
confidence that the final range of solutions for the NGATS is based on
realistic assumptions. With respect to enterprise architecture, JPDO
has established the organizational structure for enterprise
architecture development--an important first step--and anticipates
having an initial version of the architecture by the end of fiscal year
2006. Recognizing that further work will be required, JPDO is using a
multiyear phased planning approach in which the enterprise architecture
will be continuously refined. This "build a little, test a little"
approach is similar to a process that we have previously advocated for
FAA's major system acquisition programs.
Background:
FAA, with research assistance from NASA, has had the primary
responsibility for planning and implementing national airspace system
modernization since these efforts began more than 20 years ago.
Recently, FAA placed the modernization program under a new Air Traffic
Organization, headed by a Chief Operating Officer. JPDO's approach
differs from FAA's past modernization efforts in that its scope is
"curb-to-curb," encompassing in-terminal passenger and baggage security
screening and environmental issues. Additionally, JPDO's approach will
require unprecedented consensus and cooperation among many
stakeholders--federal and nonfederal--about necessary system
capabilities, equipment, procedures, and regulations. JPDO seeks to
leverage the resources of NASA and the Departments of Transportation,
Commerce, Defense, and Homeland Security, each of which has expertise
and technology that will play a part in the NGATS. For example, the
Department of Defense has deployed "network centric" systems,
originally developed for the battlefield, which are being considered as
a framework to provide all users of the national airspace system--FAA
and the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security--with a common
view of that system.
Concurrent with JPDO's efforts, the European Commission[Footnote 5] is
conducting a project to harmonize and modernize the pan-European air
traffic management system. Known as the Single European Sky Air Traffic
Management Research Programme (SESAR), the project is being managed by
the Air Traffic Alliance, an industry partnership that was awarded the
management contract by the European Organisation for the Safety of Air
Navigation (Eurocontrol).[Footnote 6] Eurocontrol develops,
coordinates, and plans for the implementation of pan-European air
traffic management strategies. While the U.S. and European efforts are
both directed at modernization, Europe faces the additional challenge
of harmonizing its air traffic control system--currently operated
through a patchwork of national air navigation service providers. The
work of the SESAR effort, which was scheduled to officially start this
month, is being done by a 30-member consortium of airlines, air
navigation service providers, airports, manufacturers, and others. The
consortium is receiving 60 million euros ($73 million)[Footnote 7] to
conduct a 2-year definition phase and produce a master plan for SESAR.
The next steps following the definition phase, from 2008 to 2013, are
currently under discussion. One proposal would develop the technologies
for the new system and would be funded annually at 300 million euros
($363 million) per year, with equal contributions being provided by the
European Commission, Eurocontrol, and other parties.
JPDO Is Engaging in Effective Practices for Interagency Collaboration,
but Faces Challenges in Leveraging Resources and Defining
Responsibilities:
Our work to date shows that JPDO has engaged in practices to facilitate
federal interagency collaboration, including defining and articulating
a common outcome; establishing mutually reinforcing or joint
strategies; and beginning to leverage the partner agency resources
needed to perform the centralized, interagency planning function for
the detailed implementation of the NGATS. However, JPDO faces a
challenge in leveraging resources because it is fundamentally a
planning and coordinating body that lacks authority over the key human
and financial resources needed to continue developing plans and system
requirements for the NGATS. Additionally, JPDO faces the challenge of
clearly defining roles and responsibilities among its partner agencies.
Our work has shown that collaborating agencies should work together to
define and agree on their respective roles and responsibilities,
including how the collaborative effort will be led. To its credit, JPDO
is taking some actions to mitigate these challenges.
JPDO Has Articulated a Common Outcome, Established Mutually Reinforcing
or Joint Strategies, and Begun to Leverage Resources:
JPDO's integrated plan provides a vision statement that elaborates on
the broadly stated common outcome set forth by the Vision 100
legislation--an air transportation system that meets potential air
traffic demand by 2025. In working together to develop JPDO's
integrated plan, the partner agencies agreed upon a broad statement of
future system goals, performance characteristics, and operational
concepts. Our research shows that, for interagency collaborative
efforts to overcome significant differences in agency missions,
cultures, and established ways of doing business, the agencies must
have a clear and compelling rationale to work together. JPDO's partner
agencies agreed to a vision statement: a transformed air transportation
system that provides services tailored to individual customer needs,
allows all communities to participate in the global economy, and
seamlessly integrates civil and military operations.
The plan also provides eight strategies--again developed by the partner
agencies--that broadly address the goals and objectives for the NGATS.
JPDO has formed eight integrated product teams (IPTs), one for each
strategy. Our work has shown that mutually reinforcing or joint
strategies help in aligning the partner agencies' activities, core
processes, and resources to accomplish the common outcome. In addition
to jointly identifying the strategies for the NGATS, the various
partner agencies have taken the lead on specific strategies. (See table
1.) JPDO is currently reevaluating whether all of these IPTs should be
expected to create products. For example, the IPT that is addressing
the global interoperability strategy might be more likely to have cross-
cutting influence over the other seven IPTs, rather than developing a
product of its own, according to JPDO officials.
Table 1: JPDO's Strategies and Responsible Agencies:
Strategy: Develop airport infrastructure to meet future demand;
Lead agency: Federal Aviation Administration.
Strategy: Establish an effective security system without limiting
mobility or civil liberties;
Lead agency: Department of Homeland Security.
Strategy: Establish an agile air traffic system that quickly responds
to shifts in demand;
Lead agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Strategy: Establish shared situational awareness--where all users share
the same information;
Lead agency: Department of Defense.
Strategy: Establish a comprehensive and proactive approach to safety;
Lead agency: Federal Aviation Administration.
Strategy: Develop environmental protection that allows sustained
aviation growth;
Lead agency: Federal Aviation Administration.
Strategy: Develop a systemwide capability to reduce weather impacts;
Lead agency: Department of Commerce.
Strategy: Harmonize equipage and operations globally;
Lead agency: Federal Aviation Administration.
Source: GAO presentation of JPDO data.
[End of table]
The National Research Council, in its recent study of JPDO, noted the
IPT structure is oriented by discipline, which the Council believes
works against a product orientation. The Council recommended that JPDO
reorganize into three IPTs that parallel the way FAA currently
organizes its operations--airport, terminal, and en route/oceanic. JPDO
officials do not agree with this recommendation. They told us that the
existing airspace segmentation by phase of flight--airport , terminal,
and en route--creates inefficiencies. As aircraft transition from one
phase of flight to the next, they encounter a "speed bump." For
example, operations are slowed as en route air traffic controllers
transfer responsibility for aircraft to terminal controllers. This
segmentation is not part of JPDO's vision for the NGATS. In our view,
if JPDO's IPT structure begins to show evidence that it is hindering
rather than promoting progress toward achieving NGATS goals, JPDO might
look again at the Council's recommendations to determine whether a
different structure or fewer IPTs would help it achieve its goals. In
the end, the progress and outcomes achieved by the structure are as
important, if not more important, than the organizational model
selected.
JPDO has begun leveraging the resources of its partner agencies, which
is another practice that we have found helps facilitate interagency
collaboration. Our research shows that collaborating agencies should
identify the human, information technology, physical, and financial
resources needed to initiate or sustain their collaborative effort. To
leverage human resources, JPDO has staffed its organization with
partner-agency employees, many of whom work for JPDO as a collateral
duty. The JPDO board, which provides coordination between partner
agencies and JPDO, is composed of key executives of the partner
agencies who can facilitate bringing agency resources to bear on NGATS
development. JPDO's eight IPTs, which are developing the plans and
requirements for the NGATS, include staff from the partner agencies.
Additionally, Vision 100 created the Next Generation Air Transportation
Senior Policy Committee, composed of partner agency senior executives,
to provide ongoing policy review and identify resource needs from the
partner agencies. (See fig. 1.)
Figure 1: JPDO Organization Chart:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
To further begin leveraging resources, during the past year JPDO
conducted an interagency program review of its partner agencies'
research and development programs to identify the work that could
support the NGATS, as well as identify areas for more effective
interagency collaboration. Through this process, JPDO identified early
opportunities that could be pursued during fiscal year 2007 to produce
tangible results for the NGATS. For example, JPDO noted that FAA had
amassed considerable technical expertise in the standards, protocols,
and near-term air traffic applications for Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). ADS-B is a technology through which an
aircraft broadcasts information on its position to ground-based
transceivers, rather than having its position detected by ground-based
radars. JPDO envisions FAA beginning to purchase ADS-B transceivers,
decommission obsolete ground-based radars, and develop air traffic
procedures that would permit ADS-B-equipped aircraft to obtain near-
term operational benefits such as routings that save fuel.
JPDO Faces Challenges in Continuing to Leverage Resources and Defining
Roles and Responsibilities:
Although JPDO's legislation, integrated plan, and established
governance structure provide the framework for institutionalizing
collaboration among multiple federal agencies, JPDO is fundamentally a
planning and coordinating body that lacks authority over the key human
and financial resources needed to continue developing plans and system
requirements for the NGATS. Consequently, leveraging resources on a
continuing basis will be critical to JPDO's success. Our research has
also shown that agreement on roles and responsibilities facilitates
interagency collaboration. However, in JPDO's situation, some important
roles and responsibilities have not yet been clearly defined.
The challenge of leveraging resources will likely intensify beginning
in 2008, when JPDO expects a significant increase in the workload of
its IPTs. JPDO anticipates needing more resources for the IPTs to,
among other things, plan demonstrations of potential technologies to
illustrate some of the early benefits that could be achieved from the
transformation to the NGATS. JPDO officials told us that, although the
partner agencies have not yet expressed concerns over the time that
their employees spend on JPDO work, it remains to be seen whether
partner agencies are willing to allow their staff to devote larger
portions of their time to JPDO as the office develops more detailed
plans and requirements for the NGATS. Partner agencies have a variety
of missions and priorities other than supporting the NGATS. Some
partner agency employees, including some IPT directors, have been told
by their partner agencies that their work for JDPO is approved so long
as it does not interfere with their regular assigned duties. Such
resource issues would ultimately go to the Senior Policy Committee for
resolution. However, the role of the committee's members, as stated in
Vision 100, is only to make recommendations to their respective
agencies for the required resources.
The challenge of leveraging financial resources has already manifested
itself. As JPDO requested, FAA included in its fiscal year 2007 budget
request to the Office of Management and Budget funding to accelerate
systems development of ADS-B and System Wide Information Management
(SWIM),[Footnote 8] which are two key systems identified for the NGATS.
However, JPDO officials told us that, while FAA did receive an
increase, it did not receive the full amount requested in the budget
formulation documents submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget.[Footnote 9] Our past work on FAA's national airspace
modernization program has shown that, among other factors, receiving
fewer resources than planned contributed to delays in implementing
technologies and significant cost increases. For example, reduced
funding was one factor that caused FAA to reduce the initial deployment
of its ASR-11 digital radar system from 111 systems to 66 systems, and
defer decisions on further deployment pending additional study. In the
meantime, FAA will have to continue to maintain the aging analog radars
that the new system was intended to replace.
JPDO also faces the challenge of clearly defining roles and
responsibilities among its partner agencies. Our work has shown that
collaborating agencies should work together to define and agree on the
respective roles and responsibilities, including how the collaborative
effort will be led. In JPDO's case, there is no formalized long-term
agreement on the partner agencies' roles and responsibilities in
creating the NGATS. According to JPDO officials, a memorandum of
understanding that would define partner agency relationships was being
developed as of August 2005, but has not yet been completed.
Defining roles and responsibilities is particularly important between
JPDO and FAA's Air Traffic Organization, since both organizations have
responsibilities related to planning national airspace system
modernization. JPDO's planning must build upon the Air Traffic
Organization's existing modernization program, while the Air Traffic
Organization must ensure that its ongoing modernization efforts are
consistent with JPDO's plans. JPDO's former director served
concurrently as the Air Traffic Organization's Vice President for
Operations Planning, which helped with coordination between the two
organizations. However, FAA now plans to establish separate positions
for the JPDO Director and the Air Traffic Organization Vice President
for Operations Planning. Doing so increases the importance of having a
clearly defined relationship between these organizations.
Ultimate decisionmaking authority is another role and responsibility
that has not been clearly defined. According to JPDO, decisions are the
collective responsibility of the government agencies. The Senior Policy
Committee makes decisions through consensus of the members. If there
are any issues that the committee cannot resolve among themselves, JPDO
officials expect that the Secretary of Transportation would elevate
these issues to the appropriate White House-level policy council, such
as the Domestic Policy Council. Although JPDO strives to make decisions
and resolve disputes through its collaborative bodies, its experience
thus far is limited. It is not clear whether this process will be
effective as the NGATS planning and implementation effort moves
forward. As part of our ongoing work, we will further explore the
decisionmaking and dispute resolution mechanisms within JPDO.
To its credit, JPDO, in concert with the Air Traffic Organization, has
begun to address these challenges. To assist with leveraging resources,
JPDO has issued guidance to its partner agencies identifying areas that
JPDO would like to see emphasized in their fiscal year 2008 budget
requests. The Air Traffic Organization, in recognition of the need to
align its plans with the 20-year planning horizon of JPDO, has extended
its planning horizon. Finally, JPDO is working with the Office of
Management and Budget to develop a systematic means of reviewing
partner agency budget requests so that the NGATS-related funding in
each budget request is easily identified. Such a process would help the
Office of Management and Budget consider NGATS as a unified program
rather than as disconnected line items across partner agency budget
requests. To better define roles and responsibilities, JPDO planned to
transmit the proposed memorandum of understanding to the JPDO board
this month.
JPDO Established Mechanisms to Involve Stakeholders but Faces
Challenges:
As required by Vision 100, JPDO developed and implemented mechanisms
for soliciting the expertise and views of federal and nonfederal
stakeholders as it plans the NGATS. Although JPDO has obtained the
involvement of over 180 participants from over 70 organizations for the
IPTs, the current air traffic controllers--who will play a key role in
the NGATS--have not been involved in JPDO's efforts. In addition, JPDO
may face challenges in sustaining stakeholder involvement over the long
term.
JPDO Is Involving Federal and Nonfederal Stakeholders:
JPDO has structured itself in a way that involves federal and
nonfederal stakeholders throughout its organization. Vision 100
directed JPDO to involve federal and nonfederal stakeholders as it
fulfills its mission. Our work shows that involving stakeholders can,
among other things, increase their support for the collaborative
effort. Federal stakeholders from the partner agencies participate with
JPDO through the Senior Policy Committee, the JPDO board, and the IPTs.
To incorporate the expertise and views of stakeholders in private
industry, state and local governments, and academia, the NGATS
Institute (the Institute) was created by an agreement between the
National Center for Advanced Technologies and FAA.[Footnote 10]
Within the Institute, the Institute Management Council (the Council),
composed of top officials and representatives from the aviation
community, oversees the policy and recommendations of the Institute.
The Council provides a means for advancing consensus positions on
critical NGATS issues. It is co-chaired by the president of the Air
Transport Association, which represents commercial airlines, and the
president of the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents airline
pilots. The Institute has solicited participation from nonfederal
stakeholders and assigned them to each IPT. Additionally, the Institute
planned to hold its first public meeting on March 28, 2006, to solicit
information from other interested stakeholders who are not involved in
the Council or the IPTs.
JPDO officials are generally pleased with the quality of stakeholder
participation. Through the Institute, JPDO obtained the participation
of over 180 stakeholders from over 70 organizations for the IPTs. The
Institute received positive feedback from IPT directors on the skills,
insight, and expertise of the private sector volunteers. Additionally,
an official affiliated with the Institute told us that the collective
quality and breadth of expertise of applicants for the IPTs has
exceeded expectations.
However, JPDO has experienced difficulties with soliciting the
participation of current air traffic controllers, who will play a key
role in the NGATS. The current air traffic control system is based
primarily on the premise that air traffic controllers direct pilots to
maintain safe separation between aircraft. In the NGATS, this premise
could change and, accordingly, JPDO has recognized the need to conduct
human factors research on such issues, including how tasks should be
allocated between humans and automated systems, and how the existing
allocation of responsibilities between pilots and air traffic
controllers might change. JPDO is tapping the expertise of former air
traffic controllers, but current air traffic controllers are not yet
involved with JPDO.
Specifically, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA)-
-the labor union that represents air traffic controllers--is not
participating in the development of the NGATS. In July 2005, FAA
terminated the controller liaison program, wherein active controllers
were assigned to, among other things, provide input on national
airspace modernization projects. At that time, the union disengaged
from participating on all FAA workgroups and technological projects,
including JPDO. Although the Institute Management Council includes a
seat for the union, an official of that union told us that the union's
head had been unable to attend the Council's meetings. According to
JPDO officials, the Council has left a seat open in hopes that the
controllers will participate in the NGATS effort at the end of the
contract negotiations between FAA and NATCA.
The lack of current air traffic controllers' participation could result
in future problems. The input of current air traffic controllers who
have recent experience controlling aircraft is important in considering
human factors and safety issues. Our work on FAA's current national
airspace modernization program has shown that early and continuing
stakeholder input is important, particularly concerning human factors,
in avoiding costly rework and schedule delays late in system
development efforts. For example, as FAA procured new air traffic
controller workstations (known as Standard Terminal Automation
Replacement Systems (STARS)), not adequately including stakeholders
during the development phase contributed to unplanned work which, in
turn, contributed to cost growth, schedule delays, and eventually a
reduction in the number of systems to be deployed.[Footnote 11]
Another method for stakeholder involvement is through JPDO's
facilitation of technology transfer in its requests for studies to be
contracted out through the Institute. For example, at JPDO's request,
the Institute plans to analyze trade-offs between potential
technologies to narrow the range of options that are most critical for
the NGATS. JPDO has sent to the Institute its first request for
studies, including an analysis of satellite navigation backup
technology.
The Institute also creates industry-government partnerships through
advanced-technology demonstrations. These demonstrations provide a
mechanism for collaboratively testing operational concepts, refining
requirements, and sharing technology between the public and private
sectors. To date, two demonstration projects have been conducted by
JPDO partner agencies, including demonstrations on the Small Aircraft
Transportation System and Network Enabled Operations.
JPDO Faces Challenges in Maintaining Nonfederal Stakeholder Support
Over the Long Term:
Although JPDO has developed the mechanisms for involving stakeholders
and brought stakeholders into the process, JPDO faces challenges in
sustaining nonfederal stakeholder participation over the long term.
Much as with the federal partner agencies, JPDO has no direct authority
over the human and financial resources of its nonfederal stakeholders.
To date, these stakeholders' investment in the NGATS effort has been
through their pro bono participation on the IPTs and the Institute
Management Council. The nonfederal stakeholders' participation varies
from approximately 10 to 25 percent of their time per week on the IPTs
and involves approximately one meeting per month for members of the
Council. The challenge for JPDO is to maintain the interest and
enthusiasm of these nonfederal stakeholders, who will have to juggle
their own multiple priorities and resource demands in order to maintain
this level of participation, when some tangible benefits may not be
realized for several years. For example, stakeholder support will be
important for programs such as SWIM, which is a necessary prerequisite
to future benefits, but may not produce tangible benefits in the near
term.
Rather than obtaining voluntary, pro bono participation from nonfederal
stakeholders, several members of our expert panel suggested JPDO should
outsource the NGATS planning efforts, as Europe has done. As previously
noted, the European SESAR effort is led by an industry consortium under
a contract with Eurocontrol. The contract calls for the consortium to
deliver a master plan at the end of a 2-year definition phase. JPDO
officials told us that they considered various ways to structure their
work, such as having the government formulate plans with industry
comment, or having industry formulate plans and provide them to the
government. JPDO settled on the existing model, which is a hybrid that
involves initial government work with close industry participation.
Because of the different circumstances surrounding the U.S. and
European approaches (such as the European need to harmonize various
national systems), we have not taken a position on which approach might
be more effective.
In the wake of past national airspace modernization efforts, JPDO also
faces the challenge of convincing nonfederal stakeholders that the
government is financially committed to the NGATS. While FAA's major air
traffic control acquisitions programs are currently on track, earlier
attempts at modernizing the national airspace system encountered many
difficulties. In one instance, for example, FAA developed a controller-
pilot datalink communications system that transmitted scripted e-mail-
like messages between controllers and pilots. One airline equipped its
aircraft with this new technology, but because of funding cuts, FAA
ended up canceling the program.[Footnote 12] In a similar vein, we have
reported that some aviation stakeholders expressed concern that FAA may
not follow through with its airspace redesign efforts and are hesitant
to invest in equipment unless they are sure that FAA's efforts will
continue.[Footnote 13] One expert with whom we spoke suggested that a
way to mitigate this issue would be for the government to make an
initial investment in a specific technology before requesting that
airlines or other industry stakeholders purchase equipment.
Finally, JPDO could face a challenge in resolving the potentially
divergent perspectives that are represented by its nonfederal
stakeholders. The range of nonfederal interests that JPDO has solicited
for this effort is broad and varied, and potentially conflicting (for
example, the interests of commercial airlines versus the interests of
general aviation aircraft owners and pilots). While the intent is to
ensure that all stakeholders are given the opportunity to participate
in developing the NGATS, dissension among these stakeholders is
nevertheless possible. A large portion of the nonfederal stakeholder
participation is through the IPTs. JPDO officials told us that they
expect IPT directors to resolve potential disputes among stakeholders
and obtain a "convergence of opinion," which is defined by JPDO as
working toward as close to a single position as possible while
recognizing that the IPT director might need to make a final decision.
JPDO officials told us that depending on the issue, the IPT director
may elect to elevate the different views to the collection of IPT
directors and senior JPDO officials for resolution. In such a
situation, JPDO will be challenged to settle the dispute without
alienating those nonfederal stakeholders who might believe themselves
to be adversely affected by the decision.
JPDO Is Using an Iterative Technical Planning Process:
JPDO is using an iterative technical planning process that appears to
be reasonable in light of the complexity of the NGATS. The planning
process includes conducting modeling--a technique that mathematically
represents the NGATS' system performance parameters, demand, and
economic factors--as well as developing an enterprise architecture--a
blueprint to guide NGATS development.
JPDO Has Begun to Use System Performance Modeling:
JPDO has formed an Evaluation and Analysis Division (EAD), composed of
FAA and NASA employees, and contractors, to assemble a suite of models
that mathematically represent the interactions among system performance
parameters, demand, and economic factors for the NGATS. These models
iteratively test the relationships and interactions among factors based
on a set of assumptions. For example, using models based on broad
assumptions concerning fleet mix and passenger and flight demand, EAD
has evaluated how the current air transportation system and proposed
NGATS alternatives react. EAD has also used modeling to determine
whether current airport capacity is sufficient to support a tripling of
air traffic. The modeling results will help JPDO further refine its
plans for the NGATS, leading to additional modeling that uses more
precisely defined assumptions, all the while narrowing the range of
potential solutions. In addition, EAD is modeling costs and benefits of
proposed NGATS solutions, as well as interactions among system
performance parameters, demand, and economic factors, to demonstrate to
JPDO management and the Office of Management and Budget that the
proposed solutions are a cost-effective way to meet strategic goals and
objectives.
Rather than creating its own models, EAD is assembling a suite of
existing models from FAA, other agencies, and contractors. To assess
the adequacy of these models, EAD has compared the results obtained
from them to known previous conditions. For example, to assess how
accurately a model reflects the impact of adverse weather on airport
capacity, EAD has compared the model's results to what actually
happened in a previous bad-weather event. In this case, the model
proved to be accurate, thereby validating its further use.
EAD recognizes the importance of human factors in designing the NGATS,
but has just begun studying this issue. Specifically, EAD has used
modeling to study how possible changes in the duties of key
individuals, such as air traffic controllers, could affect the workload
and performance of others, such as airport ground personnel. NGATS
could shift some tasks now done by air traffic controllers to pilots.
However, EAD has not yet begun to model the effect of this shift on
pilot performance because, according to an EAD official, a suitable
model has not yet been incorporated into the modeling tool suite.
According to EAD, addressing this issue is difficult because data on
pilot behavior are not readily available to use in creating such
models. Furthermore, EAD has not studied the training implications of
various NGATS-proposed solutions because further definition of the
concept of operations for these solutions has not been completed. As
the concept of operations matures, it will be important for air traffic
controllers and other affected stakeholders to provide their
perspectives on these modeling efforts.
EAD plans to use outside experts to review the adequacy of its work.
EAD will continue to publish results of its work in peer-reviewed
journals. EAD officials said they are also exploring the possibility of
pursuing a peer review relationship with SESAR officials. So far,
however, EAD's modeling efforts are in the early stages and more time
will be needed to conduct additional modeling and field testing to
increase confidence that the final range of solutions for the NGATS is
based on realistic assumptions.
JPDO Has Taken the First Steps toward Developing an Enterprise
Architecture:
An enterprise architecture is a tool, or blueprint, for understanding
and planning complex systems. It can facilitate NGATS planning by
providing a strategic and integrated approach to decisionmaking. For
example, enterprise architecture can help planners decide between
various scenarios that involve flight takeoff, flight landing, and en
route flight in bad weather. The NGATS enterprise architecture will
provide the means for coordinating among the partner agencies and
private sector manufacturers, aligning relevant research and
development activities, and integrating equipment. The enterprise
architecture will describe the current national airspace system, the
NGATS, and the sequence of steps needed to transition between them.
JPDO has taken the initial steps towards developing an enterprise
architecture and plans to have an early version by the end of fiscal
year 2006. The office has established and filled a chief architect
position and established an NGATS Architecture Council composed of
representatives from each partner agency's chief architect office. This
provides the organizational structure and oversight needed to develop
an enterprise architecture. While this is an important first step and
consistent with effective practices that we have identified in
enterprise architecture development, JPDO's enterprise architecture
development is currently a work in progress. JPDO is working toward
completing two tasks that we have also identified as effective
practices. First, JPDO is planning to use the Federal Enterprise
Architecture Security and Privacy Profile, currently under development
by the Federal Chief Information Officer Council, to help ensure
effective integration of security and privacy requirements across NGATS
enterprise architecture. Second, JPDO is developing metrics that are to
be compliant with guidance from us and the Office of Management and
Budget to measure the enterprise architecture's progress in development
and effectiveness-in-use by the end of fiscal year 2006. JPDO
recognizes that the development of the NGATS architecture will be a
multiyear process that will involve a series of interim architectures.
JPDO's phased "build a little, test a little" approach for developing
and refining its enterprise architecture is similar to a process that
we have advocated for FAA's major system-acquisition programs. After
completing the initial version of its enterprise architecture, JPDO
plans to undertake a comprehensive assessment to determine if
additional efforts are necessary to improve the architecture and
address any gaps that may have been identified. In addition, this
phased development process will allow JPDO to incorporate evolving
market forces and technologies in its architecture, and thus, to better
manage change.
Concluding Observations:
In closing, Mr. Chairman, ultimate responsibility for the success of
JPDO and the broader NGATS effort is shared among JPDO and its partner
agencies, nonfederal stakeholders, and the Congress. JPDO and its
partner agencies have responsibility to develop a plan, test
technologies through demonstrations, and implement technologies to
transform the current national airspace system in a timely and cost-
efficient manner. Nonfederal stakeholders, including industry
representatives, state and local government officials, and members of
academia, must actively participate in developing the plan. Some of
these stakeholders--such as commercial airlines and general aviation
operators--will have to follow through by equipping their aircraft to
realize the benefits of the NGATS. Finally, the success of the NGATS
will undoubtedly require support from Congress to obtain the resources
and authority necessary to complete the planning and testing stage,
acquire the necessary technologies, and develop procedures.
Consequently, Congress will face difficult decisions on how to
prioritize funding to support the NGATS with other national priorities.
These responsibilities are substantial, but failure in any one of these
areas will significantly affect JPDO's chances of achieving a three-
fold increase in airspace capacity by 2025.
This concludes my statement. I would be pleased to respond to any
questions that you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have at
this time.
Contact and Acknowledgements:
For further information on this testimony, please contact Gerald
Dillingham at (202) 512-2834 or by e-mail at dillinghamg@gao.gov.
Individuals making key contributions to this testimony include
Nabajyoti Barkakati, Colin Fallon, David Hooper, Heather Krause,
Elizabeth Marchak, Edmond Menoche, Faye Morrison, Richard Scott, and
Sarah Veale.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry,
Final Report (Nov. 2002).
[2] The Air Traffic Organization is FAA's business unit that is
responsible for operating, maintaining, and modernizing the nation's
current air traffic control system.
[3] GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance
and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
[4] National Research Council, Technology Pathways: Assessing the
Integrated Plan for a Next Generation Air Transportation System
(Washington, D.C.: 2005).
[5] The European Commission is a politically independent institution
that prepares and implements legislative instruments.
[6] Eurocontrol is an autonomous organization established in 1963 with
the intention of creating a single upper airspace.
[7] A portion of this funding is in-kind services from Eurocontrol. To
convert euros to U.S. dollars, we used 1.2098, the foreign exchange
rate for Tuesday, March 21, 2006, as published in The Washington Post.
[8] SWIM would support the transition to network-centric operations by
providing the infrastructure and associated policies and standards to
enable information sharing among all authorized users, such as the
airlines, other government agencies, and the military.
[9] FAA's fiscal year 2007 budget request for research and development
includes about $18 million for JPDO, which is supplemented by matching
funds from NASA. NASA has committed to continuing this match in the
future, according to a JPDO official. JPDO uses these funds to conduct
planning and studies. Outyear funding plans for JPDO show a slight
decline through fiscal year 2010. Vision 100 authorized $50 million
annually for seven years for JPDO.
[10] The National Center for Advanced Technologies is a nonprofit unit
within the Aerospace Industries Association.
[11] GAO, National Airspace System: Transformation will Require
Cultural Change, Balanced Funding Priorities, and Use of All Available
Management Tools, GAO-06-154 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 14, 2005).
[12] JPDO noted that FAA used this technology to conduct an operational
datalink demonstration that will provide valuable information for
developing future requirements and reducing development and
implementation risks.
[13] GAO-06-154.
