(The following letter was hand delivered to each member of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, in response to a hearing held June 12, 1997, on staff shortages among FAA air traffic control facilities in the New York metropolitan area.)
June 12, 1997
Dear Senator:
When you and your colleagues on the Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies meet for today's hearing on air traffic control staffing issues, you will be learning about only a small part of the problem confronting FAA employees and management. The very real problems being discussed are national in scope and not simply limited to New York. On behalf of the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists, I wanted to take this opportunity to apprise you of other controller-related problems and urge that you consider them at the same time you deliberate those in the New York metropolitan area.
As you may know, the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists (NAATS) is the organization representing all FAA Air Traffic Control Specialists employed in the agency's Flight Service Stations throughout the country. A Flight Service Station is a FAA-operated facility providing pre-flight weather and flight planning information, in-flight updates and aeronautical facility data to pilots operating commercial, military and general aviation aircraft 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. There are 61 Automated Flight Service Stations (AFSS) located throughout the United States, supplemented by several Auxiliary (XFSS) and seasonal (FSS) facilities.
While we are certain ATC staffing problems exist in and around New York, we are concerned that today's hearing may leave you and your colleagues with the false impression that this area is the only group of FAA facilities in the United States facing staff shortages.
Of particular concern to NAATS, however, is that between 1981 and 1995 (the most recent period for which the agency has provided accurate data), the FAA has systematically downsized the personnel working at its flight service stations by almost one thousand individuals: from some 3500 to roughly 2500. This occurred while the number of FSS facilities was consolidated down from over 300 in the early 1980s to less than 100 today. During this same period, however, the number of FSS management and supervisory personnel assigned to Flight Service has been reduced by only six through 1995. In addition to the morale and workload problems this situation has created, we believe the Senate should question the need for this huge number of managers when there are significantly fewer employees -- and facilities -- to manage.
As you and your colleagues examine ATC staffing shortages in New York, we hope you will also look at why so many Flight Service management and supervisory personnel are required for so few workers. Clearly, the FAA does not require nearly the same number of managers as it did 16 years ago to oversee the drastically reduced workforce of today.
Further, many current FS Controllers are nearing retirement eligibility in the next three to five years. But, no new ones are in the FAA's training pipeline to take their place. This is despite FAA forecasts which conclude that, in the next few years, significant increases will occur in all types of aircraft operations addressed by Flight Service. Quite simply, as these well-trained and highly experienced men and women leave the FAA, there is no cadre of replacements ready to take their place.
We hope you share our concern that the FAA is unwisely failing to plan for these pending retirements. To meet this challenge, the agency's training academy at Oklahoma City should be required to initiate the multi-year training required to produce fully-qualified Flight Service Controllers. The academy is well-equipped for this purpose and -- most importantly -- has the scheduling flexibility to accept 100 trainees during FY 1998. We would look forward to working with you to address this emerging problem, again, on a national basis.
Finally, the equipment with which our members are forced to work is just as old and failure-prone as that in use at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center and Terminal Radar Approach Control facilities, as well as at other locations around the country. In fact, system-wide failures of the equipment at Flight Service Stations happen regularly. Of course, the workers at an FSS compensate for these outages and failures. Fewer people available to provide weather information to pilots, file flight plans and provide in-flight updates also means that correspondingly fewer workers are available to adapt to these failures when they occur.
The FAA, to its credit, recognizes the problems associate with the aging equipment at our facilities and has developed the OASIS program as the next-generation set of tools to be installed at AFSS facilities. This program is one of the "lead-the-fleet" procurements initially placed under the FAA's new acquisition system in 1996. Unfortunately, it is already three years behind schedule, and full funding is necessary for it in FY 1998 if it is to be placed in workers' hands in a timely, cost-efficient manner.
Although today's hearing was -- perhaps -- properly focused on a problem affecting the New York area, it overlooked how the problem of inadequate staffing affects all of the FAA's safety-related personnel. I and my co-workers within NAATS look forward to working with you and your colleagues to address and resolve these problems on a national basis.
Sincerely,
Walter W. Pike
Chief Executive Officer
Our Address:
NAATS 11303 Amherst Avenue Suite 4 Wheaton, MD 20902 301/933-6228 301/933-3902 fax Walter W. Pike, Chief Executive Officer
