Senator Andrews: CONTINUING RESOLUTION You are planning to let a very major contract for your advanced automation program out of your FY 1984 R,E&D appropriation. If you had to operate under a continuing resolution, would it affect your programs? Response: If we were required to operate under a continuing resolution during FY 1984, major elements of our R, E&D program would be significantly affected. In FY 1984 our R,E&D program requirements are more than double the FY 1983 program. A large part of this increase is in the Advanced Automation Program which increases fourfold from $39.5 million in FY 1983 to $157 million in FY 1984. Under normal guidance provided under a continuing resolution, major contracts for procurement of Host systems and contracts for the design of the Advanced Automation System could not proceed. This would cause overall program delays and result in increased costs. Other critical programs, including aviation weather, aircraft safety and Automated En Route ATC (AERA) would also be affected. F&E OBLIGATIONS Senator Andrews: Over the years, how successful has the FAA been in obligating facilities and equipment funds that have been appropriated by the Congress? Give us a recap for the record for the past five and six years of budget authority vs. obligations. Response: We have a chart which indicates appropriation and obligation activity for the past twelve years. MLS SITING CRITERIA Senator Andrews: One of the greatest potential benefits of MLS is its adaptability to a wide range of site conditions thus reducing the amount of site preparation costs required as compared to regular Instrument Landing Systems (ILS). Has the FAA published the siting criteria for MLS? What is reasonable estimate of the average site preparation cost for MLS. Compare that to historical averages for ILS. Response: The initial siting criteria for MLS has been published in FAA Report #DOT/FAA/PM-83/2 dated February 1983. This report is intended to provide guidance to the eventual MLS production contractor who will be responsible for performing a full "turnkey" installation, including the site engineering activities. There is no site preparation required for MLS in order to achieve satisfactory system performance. In the case of ILS, the amount of site preparation depends on the site conditions and these costs vary substantially from site to site. It is difficult to obtain historical data on ILS site prepration since, in the past, this work was usually accomplished by the airport sponsor as a part of an airport improvement project. During preparation of the MLS cost/benefit study (FAA Report No. FAA-EM-80-7 dated June 1980), FAA obtained data on a cross section of ILS locations. The site preparation costs for these locations ranged from $0 to over $1.0 million. Based on this data an average cost of $90,000 was used for a nominal site and $230,000 for a difficult site. Senator Andrews: Several small communities are buying and installing a version of MLS equipment now available in the market. Detail for the record where these installations are and what is any unusual siting problems have occurred? Response: The first operational MLS was installed at Valdez, AK. The airport is surrounded by mile high mountains which limited the instrument procedure to a non-precision approach using a localizer/ DME with minimums of 3,840 feet decision height and three mile visibility. Installation of the MLS provided a precision approach for STOL aircraft with initial minimums of 1000 feet decision height and two mile visibility. With operational experience, a STOL operator could expect to receive minimum as low as 500 feet decision height and three quarter mile visibility. There were no site preparation costs associated with the MLS installation at Valdez. Additional installations are underway at Cadillac, Sturgis and Bellaire, Michigan. Site preparation costs, e.g., grading, cutting operations, tree removal, were avoided by the selection of the MLS in lieu of the ILS at Sturgis and Bellaire. FLIGHT INSPECTION FLEET Senator Andrews: Please provide a brief summary of the average duty cycles for all aircraft in the carrier flight inspection fleet. Response: The flight inspection aircraft are maintained under a segmented maintenance program and no time is lost for scheduled maintenance. All maintenance is performed between scheduled flights We have 30 flight inspection aircraft; 4 aircraft have a service life of 30,000 flight hours, 15 aircraft have a service life of 10,000 flight hours and the remaining 11 aircraft have no service life limit. These 11 aircraft have no limitation to service life because of the manufacturing and certification process used by the aircraft company. The approximate annual flight hour utilization of flight inspection aircraft are: 24 light-twin aircraft, 865 hours each, 5 medium-range aircraft, 535 hours each, and 1 long-range aircraft, 300 hours. This variance in average utilization is the result of differences in operational capabilities and efficiencies of the different aircraft types in the FAA flight inspection fleet. The FAA presently imposes many short-term operational limitations and/ or restrictions in order to reduce costs and fuel comsumption as much as possible. These limitations will be unnecessary when the new fuel efficient aircraft are fully operational. SPECIAL MISSION AIRCRAFT Senator Andrews: You have requested two special mission turboprop aircraft (p. 292) for flight inspection of navigation aids which characterized as difficult sites. Please define difficult sites and exlain why special aircraft are needed. Response: Difficult sites are those where terrain conditions require steep approaches or climb gradients for missed approach or takeoff. These locations often involve runways which are less than 4,000 feet in length. Additionally, the terrain around these locations usually causes some distortion in the signals from the navigation facilities. The distortion can be corrected if the source, generally reflections, can be identified. The special mission aircraft will be equipped with the devices and antennas necessary to identify reflecting sources. Senator Andrews: On that same page you are asking for four other aircraft (light twin turboprop) - two of which are to replace more costly turbine powered planes in Alaska and two that will be backup planes for flight inspection in the lower 48 states. What cost justification is there for backup aircraft? Response: The backup aircraft are needed in order to support the projected increases in the flight inspection workloads resulting from the introduction of new navigation aids into the National Airspace System. They will also perform much of the work presently being accomplished by turbojet aircraft thus limiting their use as much as possible to reduce operating costs and fuel consumption. Senator Andrews: ASBESTOS INSULATION Congress provided funds in FY 1983 to support removal or containment of insulation materials that contained unsafe levels of asbestos fibers from three en route centers. Test at the centers showed that the concentration of airborne asbestos particles was high enough to exceed OSHA standards in certain work areas. What progress is the FAA making in controlling asbestos at locations where dangerous concentrations were found? Describe the monitoring program that the agency has for verifying safe levels of the substance in the air where employees must work. Response: Funding has been provided to each of the three locations to encapsulate the hazardous material in specially developed coating material to eliminate the hazard until it is removed in conjunction with major building modernization/expansion programs in FY-85 thru 87. A program developed and administered by our Office of Aviation Medicine requires that air sampling tests be performed on an annual basis in those areas where the potential for possible employee exposure exists. Senator Andrews: What long-term solutions are planned? Response: Major facility modifications are planned at all ARTCC Centers in conjunction with the Advanced Automation System implementation in the FY-85 thru FY-87 period. All asbestos containing material will be removed at that time. The removal effort will comply with all OSHA and EPA requirements for handling and disposal of asbestos material. CERTIFICATION OF B-767 Senator Andrews: Please state the FAA policy toward certification of the twin-engine B-767 wide body aircraft for transoceanic flights? How does that policy differ from that expressed by European governments regarding transoceanic flights for the Airbus A-300 series aircraft? Response: The A-300 is a two-engine airplane similar to the new Boeing 757 and 767. The current U.S. regulatory requirements concerning long-range operations by two-engine airplanes over water or uninhabited terrain are contained in Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 121. However, most foreign air carriers operating to the United States observe the standards contained in Annex 6 to the Convention of International Civil Aviation and not Part 121. Recently, there has been an increasing interest within the United States and some foreign states to reexamine these standards. Last December, members of the Administrator's staff met informally with a group of aviation experts from several major aviation states, aircraft manufacturers, and engine manufacturers to discuss this issue. At this meeting, most members agreed that the international standards pertaining to overwater flights possibly could be modified and improved. However, in view of the catastrophic effect of a double engine failure, loss of any system which is essential to flight, or other factors such as fire containment/suppression, the members also agreed that present standards could only be relaxed after the completion of a careful study. At the conclusion of the meeting, it was agreed that individual members, especially airframe and engine manufacturers, would examine the implications of the principles established at the meeting and that these principles would be thoroughly examined in light of the available statistical data on in-flight engine shutdowns. It is intended that the results of these studies be circulated in the near future for review and analysis by all members prior to convening a second meeting to continue the discussions. In view of that and until such time as these safety concerns are thoroughly documented and adequately addressed, the FAA is inclined not to authorize a U.S. certificate holder to operate two-engine airplanes on extended overwater flights in excess of that currently permitted. FAR Section 121.161, in part, prohibits a two-engine airplane (regardless of the type of propulsion) from operating over a route that contains a point farther than 1 hour flying time (in still air at normal cruising speed with one engine inoperative) from an adequate airport unless authorized by the Administrator. adequate airport is one which meets the requirements of Section 121.97 or Section 121.117, as appropriate. An Annex 6 to the Convention of International Civil Aviation does not contain a limitation (1 hour flying time) such as that contained in the FAR. Supplemental information in the form of an attachment (Attachment C) to Annex 6 does suggest that airplanes remain within 90 minutes of a suitable airport. However, attachments to the Annexes are illustrative examples only and not Standards and Recommended Practices. We are aware of at least one government (Federal Republic of Germany) which has authorized one of its operators to operate two-engine aircraft (specifically the A-300) across the Atlantic Ocean. AIR TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS Senator Andrews: In your testimony last week before Congressman Lehman's Subcommittee on Transportation you said existing restrictions on air traffic will be reduced or eliminated by December 1983 with the exception that pre-strike flow control methods and other measures to prevent excess traffic build up during peak hours will be maintained. Does the General Aviation Reservation system have any continuing utility now that capacity is being restored? Response: GAR continues to serve a vital role in controlling the traffic peaks within the system specifically in those areas where capacity has not been completely restored. As the air traffic control systems capacity is increased the General Aviation Reservation (GAR) system will be phased out. Senator Andrews: You indicated also that on April 24 system capacity will be increased by an expansion of the FAA's Tower En Route Control Program to eventually all metropolitan areas with nearly 2000 published routes to be available. Describe for the record how the traffic workload at the most overburdened Centers relieved by this program. Response: Prior to the strike of August 3, 1981, approximately a hundred terminal air traffic control (ATC) facilities were providing Tower En Route Control (TEC) service. Immediately after the strike and during the time since, we have expanded the TEC network to include 179 terminal facilities and 1,945 published routes as of April 14. The relief provided to critically staffed en route facilities was two fold: One, lower levels of airspace previously delegated to these en route facilities was redelegated to selected terminal facilities. This removed an undetermined, but significant, number of aircraft/flights from en route airspace and |