|
Table of
Contents
|
Paragraph
Number
|
Title
|
|
1-1-8
|
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROCEDURAL CHANGES
|
|
3-3-2
|
TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
3-9-1
|
MINIMUM VECTORING ALTITUDE CHARTS (MVAC) FOR
FACILITIES PROVIDING APPROACH CONTROL SERVICES
|
|
4-6-4
|
FAA FORM 7230-4, DAILY RECORD OF FACILITY
OPERATION
|
|
4-6-5
|
PREPARATION OF FAA FORM 7230-4
|
|
5-1-2
|
Monitoring the presidential aircraft flight
|
|
10-4-6
|
SIMULTANEOUS ILS/MLS APPROACHES
|
|
10-4-8
|
PRECISION RUNWAY MONITOR-SIMULTANEOUS OFFSET
INSTRUMENT APPROACHES
|
|
17-5-10
|
NTML PROCEDURES
|
|
17-5-12
|
DELAY REPORTING
|
|
17-18-3
|
EXPLANATION OF TERMS
|
|
17-18-5
|
RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
17-23-1
|
PURPOSE
|
|
17-23-2
|
DEFINITION
|
|
17-23-3
|
POLICY
|
|
17-23-4
|
RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
Appendix 4
|
Glide Slope Outage Waiver Request
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND
TITLE: 1-1-8. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROCEDURAL CHANGES
2. BACKGROUND: The ATC Procedures
Group (ATCPO) was established under the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) with
guidance and direction from the Operations Support Group (OSG). The ATCPO is
responsible for the development and stewardship of air traffic control
procedures and operates collaboratively with Terminal, En Route, Flight
Services, Traffic Management, Operations Security, DOD, and other organizations
that generate procedures actions.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
Add
|
|
1-1-8. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROCEDURAL CHANGES
|
|
Add
|
|
Any recommended changes to this order
must be submitted to the Vice President, Mission Support Services, Attn: ATC
Procedures Office.
|
|
Add
|
|
a. Personnel should submit
recommended changes in procedures to facility management.
|
|
Add
|
|
b. Recommendations from other
sources should be submitted through appropriate FAA, military, or industry/user
channels.
|
|
1-1-8 through 1-1-11
|
|
Renumber 1-1-9 through 1-1-12.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 3-3-2.
TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS
2. BACKGROUND: In 2007 flight
services in the contiguous United States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, transitioned
to a new concept of operations. In this concept of operations, services are not
exclusive to a particular facility. A calling tree routes calls based on the
Area of Responsibility a specialist is logged into.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
3-3-2. TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
3-3-2. TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
a. Answer public access telephones by
stating the facility's name and type. The employee may state his/her name at
his/her discretion. If, for any reason, a caller specifically requests
identification, the employee should provide his/her assigned operating initials
in lieu of the actual name.
|
|
a. Answer public access telephones by
stating the facility's name and type. The employee may state his/her name at
his/her discretion. If, for any reason, a caller specifically requests
identification, the employee should provide his/her assigned operating initials
in lieu of the actual name.
Contract facilities must answer public access lines by stating the name of
the service provider and type.
|
|
EXAMPLE-
ARTCC: (The facility's name) Center; e.g., Washington
Center.
FSS: (The facility's name) Flight Service; e.g.,
Prescott Flight Service.
ATCT: (The facility's name) Tower; e.g., Atlanta Tower.
Approach Control: (The facility's name) Approach
Control; e.g., Dulles Approach Control.
|
|
EXAMPLE-
ARTCC:(The facility's name) Center; for example,
“Washington Center."
FSS: (The facility's name) Flight Service; for example,
“Juneau Flight Service" or “(Service Provider Name)
Flight Service."
ATCT: (The facility's name) Tower; for example,
“Atlanta Tower."
Approach Control: (The facility's name) Approach
Control; for example, “Dulles Approach Control."
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 3-9-1.
MINIMUM VECTORING ALTITUDE CHARTS (MVAC) FOR FACILITIES PROVIDING APPROACH
CONTROL SERVICES
2. BACKGROUND: FUSION is the
combination of all available surveillance sources (airport surveillance radar
[ASR], air route surveillance radar [ARSR], automatic dependent surveillance –
broadcast [ADS-B], etc.) into the display of a single track for each target for
air traffic control separation services. FUSION is the equivalent of the current
single-sensor radar display. FUSION performance is characteristic of a
single-sensor radar display system. The performance of this system will be used
as the baseline radar system to ensure minimal degradation of current separation
operations within the NAS. This paragraph incorporates processes for development
of MVA Charts for locations using the FUSION software and tracker. The agency
has been crafting tailored Notices for individual facilities that are planning
to utilize FUSION and have reached initial operating capability (IOC). By
incorporating this content into this handbook, future individual notices will no
longer be required.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
3-9-1. MINIMUM VECTORING ALTITUDE CHARTS
(MVAC) FOR FACILITIES PROVIDING APPROACH CONTROL SERVICES
|
|
3-9-1. MINIMUM VECTORING ALTITUDE CHARTS
(MVAC) FOR FACILITIES PROVIDING APPROACH CONTROL SERVICES
|
|
Air traffic managers must determine the
location and the method for the display of vectoring altitude charts to provide
controllers with the minimum vectoring altitudes as follows:
|
|
Air traffic managers must determine the
location and the method for the display of vectoring altitude charts to provide
controllers with the minimum vectoring altitudes as follows:
|
|
a. Where the system is adapted
to display single radar sensors, provide:
|
|
a. Where the system is
configured to display single radar sensors, provide:
|
|
a1 through a2
|
|
No Change
|
|
b. Where the system is adapted
to simultaneously display multiple radar sensors, provide an MVAC that
accommodates the largest separation minima of all available sensors.
|
|
b. Where the system is
configured to simultaneously display multiple radar sensors, provide an
MVAC that accommodates the largest separation minima of all available sensors;
or
|
|
c. Where the system is adapted to
display multiple radar sensors in a priority sequence (for example, sort boxes),
provide an MVAC that accommodates the largest separation minima of adapted
sensors.
|
|
c. Where the system is utilizing FUSION
mode, develop an MVAC that provides:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Threemile separation minima
or more from obstacles, except when applying the provision in paragraph 391c2.
The MVAC must depict obstacle clearances, outward to the lateral limits of the
associated approach control airspace and an appropriate buffer outside the
lateral approach control airspace boundaries. As a minimum, this may be
accomplished by using the existing singlesensor MVAC for the predominant radar
sensor; and
|
|
Add
|
|
2. Five-mile separation minima
from obstacles for use whenever the FUSION system cannot provide 3-mile
separation due to degraded status or system limitations.
|
|
Add
|
|
d. At locations adding FUSION,
provided the facility uses existing MVA charts with 3-mile buffers and an MVAC
with 5-mile buffers, additional charts do not need to be developed to support
FUSION.
|
|
NOTE-
Technical Operations Aviation System Standards, National Flight
Procedures Group should be contacted if assistance is required. (See FAAO
8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)
Chapter 10.)
|
|
NOTE-
Mission Support Services-Aeronautical Products, ATC Products Group,
should be contacted if assistance is required. (See FAAO 8260.3, United States
Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) Chapter 10.)
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 4-6-4.
FAA FORM 7230-4, DAILY RECORD OF FACILITY OPERATION; and 4-6-5. PREPARATION OF
FAA FORM 7230-4
2. BACKGROUND: When Comprehensive
Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting (CEDAR) is fully deployed, it will
provide air traffic management with an electronic means of assessing air traffic
employee performance, managing resources, and capturing safety-related
information and metrics. The tool will provide a standard interface for the
collection, retrieval, and reporting of data from multiple sources. CEDAR will
automate the creation, management, and storage of facility activities and
events, briefing items, quality assurance reviews, and FAA forms, such as
3120-25, OJT Instruction/Evaluation Report, and 7230-4, Daily Record of Facility
Operations. In addition, CEDAR will streamline many functions that managers use
to execute their responsibilities as described in FAA Order 7210.3, Facility
Operation and Administration; FAA Order 7210.56, Air Traffic Quality Assurance;
and FAA Order 3120.4, Air Traffic Technical Training.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
4-6-4. FAA FORM 7230-4, DAILY RECORD OF
FACILITY OPERATION
|
|
4-6-4. FAA FORM 7230-4, DAILY RECORD OF
FACILITY OPERATION
|
|
title through a
|
|
No Change
|
|
1. Each air traffic facility must use
the Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting (CEDAR) program to
complete an automated version of FAA Form 7230-4.
|
|
1. Each air traffic facility,
excluding Federal contract towers (FCT) and FAA flight service stations,
must use the Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting (CEDAR)
program to complete an automated version of FAA Form 7230-4.
|
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
4-6-5. PREPARATION OF FAA FORM 7230-4
|
|
4-6-5. PREPARATION OF FAA FORM 7230-4
|
|
title through h1
|
|
No Change
|
|
2. Terminal facilities may establish
local forms and procedures for recording, disseminating, and documenting the
resolution of QARs. Local forms used for recording this information are
considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and must be filed with it.
|
|
2. Terminal facilities and
flight service stations may utilize an automated version of FAA
Form 7230-4 or establish local forms and procedures for recording,
disseminating, and documenting the resolution of QARs. Local forms used for
recording this information are considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and
must be filed with it.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 5-1-2.
MONITORING THE PRESIDENTIAL AIRCRAFT FLIGHT
2. BACKGROUND: In March 2011, an
incident involving Executive One Foxtrot (EXEC1F) highlighted the necessity to
add Vice President and EXEC1F flights to the monitoring requirements identified
in FAA Order JO 7210.3.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
5-1-2. MONITORING THE PRESIDENTIAL
AIRCRAFT FLIGHT
|
|
5-1-2. THE PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT,
AND EXEC1F AIRCRAFT MONITORING
|
|
a. Advance scheduled movement
information of Presidential aircraft received from the White House must be
distributed to the air traffic manager of each facility through which the
Presidential aircraft will transit. The air traffic manager will be
notified of the scheduled movement by the appropriate Service Area office or,
when time critical, by national headquarters through the ATCSCC.
|
|
a. Advance scheduled movement
information of the President, Vice President, and Executive One Foxtrot
(EXEC1F) aircraft received from the White House must be
distributed to the air traffic manager of each facility through which
these
aircraft will transit.
|
|
Add
|
|
b. The ATM will be notified of the
scheduled movement of the President, Vice President, or EXEC1F aircraft by the
appropriate service center office or, when time critical, by national
headquarters through the ATCSCC or the DEN.
|
|
b. Presidential aircraft
must be aurally and visually monitored by a supervisory
specialist/controller-in-charge (CIC) from departure to arrival. The air
traffic manager of each facility through which the Presidential aircraft
transits must ensure that a supervisory specialist/CIC aurally and visually
monitors the aircraft while in the facility's airspace. The supervisory
specialist/CIC must:
|
|
c. The President, Vice
President, and EXEC1F
aircraft must be aurally and visually monitored by a supervisory
specialist/controller-incharge (CIC) from departure to arrival as follows:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. The ATM of each facility
through which the President transits must ensure that a supervisory
specialist/CIC aurally and visually monitors the aircraft while in the
facility's airspace.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. The ATM of each facility
through which the Vice President and EXEC1F aircraft transits must ensure that a
supervisory specialist/CIC aurally and visually monitors the aircraft while in
the facility's airspace where sufficient on-duty staffing allows.
|
|
Add
|
|
d. The supervisory specialist/CIC must:
|
|
1. Be present at each sector/position
providing ATC service to the Presidential aircraft from the flight's
entry in the facility's airspace until the flight exits the facility's airspace.
|
|
1. Be present at each sector/position
providing ATC service to the President, Vice President, and EXEC1F
aircraft from the flight's entry in the facility's airspace until the flight
exits the facility's airspace.
|
|
2. Aurally and visually monitor the
flight to ensure that separation, control, and coordination are accomplished.
|
|
2. Aurally and visually monitor
these flights to ensure that separation, control, and
coordination are accomplished.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 10-4-6.
SIMULTANEOUS ILS/MLS APPROACHES, and Appendix 4. Glide Slope Outage Waiver
Request
2. BACKGROUND: Fortythree airports
currently conduct simultaneous approaches to parallel runways. The use of
simultaneous approaches is an important procedural method for airports to handle
a high volume of arrival traffic without extensive delays. Current requirements
stipulate that all components of the ILS, including the glide slope, must be
functioning to use those simultaneous approaches.
When a glide slope outage occurs, it can have a significant impact on the
airport acceptance rate. Options to work around an outage of a glide slope could
include a single runway arrival operation, or dual simultaneous approaches at
airports where triple approach operations are conducted. These options reduce
arrival capacity by onethird to onehalf. Another option is to utilize runways
that are not the preferred runways for wind direction. This option could present
issues with long landing rolls, longer runway occupancy times, and tail wind on
final. The last option is to use a runway designed as a departure runway for
arrivals. This often introduces new risks associated with increased runway
crossings and lack of high speed taxiways.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
10-4-6. SIMULTANEOUS ILS/MLS
APPROACHES
|
|
10-4-6. SIMULTANEOUS APPROACHES
(DEPENDENT/ INDEPENDENT)
|
|
The concept for conducting
simultaneous ILS, MLS, or ILS and MLS approaches to parallel runways
with straightin approaches is:
|
|
The requirements for
conducting simultaneous
straightin approaches to parallel runways are:
|
|
Add
|
|
a. Dependent approaches may be
conducted when a minimum distance of 2,500 feet, but no more than 9,000 feet,
exists between centerlines.
|
|
Add
|
|
REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 596, Simultaneous Dependent Approaches, FIG 597
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 596, Simultaneous Dependent Approaches, FIG 598
|
|
Add
|
|
b. Independent approaches may be
conducted when:
|
|
a. A separate ILS/MLS system
is required for each parallel runway. A minimum distance of 4,300 feet between
centerlines is required when dual simultaneous MLS or ILS front course
approaches are used. A minimum distance of 5,000 feet between centerlines is
required for triple simultaneous ILS, MLS or ILS, and MLS approaches at airports
with field elevation less than 1,000 feet MSL. Other integral parts of the total
Simultaneous ILS/MLS Approach System include radar, communications, ATC
procedures, and appropriate airborne equipment.
|
|
Delete
|
|
Add
|
|
1. A minimum distance of 4,300
feet between centerlines is required when dual simultaneous approaches are used.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. A minimum distance of 5,000
feet between centerlines is required for triple simultaneous approaches at
airports with field elevation less than 1,000 feet MSL.
|
|
Add
|
|
c. Speciallydesigned instrument
approach procedures annotated with “simultaneous approaches authorized with Rwy
XX” are authorized for simultaneous dependent and independent approaches.
|
|
Add
|
|
d. Equipment required to
maintain communication, navigation, and surveillance systems is operational with
the glide slope exception as noted below.
|
|
Add
|
|
e. Operations without vertical
guidance may be continued for up to 29 days provided the following conditions
are met:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Each facility must have a
contingency plan for unplanned glide slope out procedures approved by the Air
Traffic Safety Oversight Service (AOV).
|
|
Add
|
|
2. At a minimum, the following
special provisions and conditions must be identified in the plan, if applicable,
along with any other facilityspecific requirements:
|
|
Add
|
|
(a) The facility must have final
monitor controllers with override capability.
|
|
Add
|
|
(b) The facility must have radar
coverage down to the decision altitude or minimum descent altitude, as
applicable.
|
|
Add
|
|
(c) A “No Transgression Zone”
(NTZ) must be established and used.
|
|
Add
|
|
(d) Approaches must be
terminated to the runway without a glide slope whenever the reported visibility
is below the SLOC minimum for that runway.
|
|
Add
|
|
(e) Any required equipment for
the approach with the glide slope out of service must be operational, such as
DME or VORTAC. This equipment must be identified in the facility contingency
plan for glide slope out procedures.
|
|
Add
|
|
(f) Mode C requirements must not
be waived for any aircraft conducting an ILS approach with the glide slope out
of service.
|
|
Add
|
|
(g) An LOA with the ATCT (or
facility directive for a combined facility) must contain a description of the
procedures, requirements, and any limitations as specified in the facility
contingency plan for glide slope out of service procedures.
|
|
Add
|
|
(h) The ATC facility must notify
Technical Operations personnel of the glide slope outage.
|
|
Add
|
|
REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7210.3, Paragraph 352, System Component Malfunctions
|
|
Add
|
|
(i) The ATC facility must notify
arriving pilots that the glide slope is out of service. This can be accomplished
via the ATIS broadcast.
|
|
Add
|
|
(j) Any other requirements
specified in the local facility contingency plan for glide slope out procedures
must be complied with before conducting simultaneous approach procedures.
|
|
Add
|
|
(k) Controllers must be trained
and provided annual refresher training concerning the application of these
procedures.
|
|
Add
|
|
(l) The ATC facility must record
when the glide slope outage occurs and any adverse impact on the operation in
FAA Form 72304, Daily Record of Facility Operation.
|
|
Add
|
|
(m) Any loss of separation or
break out associated with operations under a contingency plan for glide slope
out must be reported to the Terminal Procedures Group Manager at FAA
Headquarters (HQ).
|
|
Add
|
|
f. Simultaneous approaches with
the glide slope unusable must be discontinued after 29 days unless a waiver has
been submitted to and approved by FAA HQ. (See Appendix 4.)
|
|
b. When simultaneous ILS/MLS
approaches are being conducted, the pilot is expected to inform approach
control, prior to departing an outer fix, if the aircraft does not have the
appropriate airborne equipment or they do not choose to conduct a simultaneous
approach. Provide individual handling to such aircraft.
|
|
g. When simultaneous approaches
are being conducted, the pilot is expected to inform approach control, prior to
departing an outer fix, if the aircraft does not have the appropriate airborne
equipment or they do not choose to conduct a simultaneous approach. Provide
individual handling to such aircraft.
|
|
c. Closely monitor weather
activity that could impact the final approach course. Weather conditions in the
vicinity of either final approach course may dictate a change of the approach in
use. (See subpara 10-1-6b Note, Selecting Active Runways.)
|
|
h. Closely monitor weather
activity that could impact the final approach course. Weather conditions in the
vicinity of either final approach course may dictate a change of the approach in
use. (See subpara 10-1-6b Note, Selecting Active Runways.)
|
|
d. All turn-on's and
final approaches are monitored by radar. Since the primary responsibility for
navigation rests with the pilot, instructions from the controller are limited to
those necessary to ensure separation between aircraft. Information and
instructions are issued, as necessary, to contain the aircraft's flight path
within the “Normal Operating Zone” (NOZ). Aircraft which are observed to enter
the “No Transgression Zone” (NTZ) are instructed to alter course
left or right, as appropriate, to return to the desired course. Unless altitude
separation is assured between aircraft, immediate action must be taken by the
controller monitoring the adjacent parallel approach course to require the
aircraft in potential conflict to alter its flight path to avoid the deviating
aircraft.
|
|
i. All turn-ons and final
approaches are monitored by radar. Since the primary responsibility for
navigation rests with the pilot, instructions from the controller are limited to
those necessary to ensure separation between aircraft. Information and
instructions are issued, as necessary, to contain the aircraft's flight path
within the “Normal Operating Zone” (NOZ). Aircraft which are observed to enter
the NTZ are instructed to alter course left or right, as appropriate, to return
to the desired course. Unless altitude separation is assured between aircraft,
immediate action must be taken by the controller monitoring the adjacent
parallel approach course to require the aircraft in potential conflict to alter
its flight path to avoid the deviating aircraft.
|
|
e. Missed approach procedures
are established with climbs on diverging courses. To reduce the possibility of
error, the missed approach procedure for a single runway operation should be
revised, as necessary, to be identical with that of a simultaneous
ILS/MLS operation.
|
|
j. Missed approach procedures
are established with climbs on diverging courses. To reduce the possibility of
error, the missed approach procedure for a single runway operation should be
revised, as necessary, to be compatible with that of a
simultaneous approach operation.
|
|
f. The following minimum radar
and communications equipment must be provided for monitoring simultaneous
ILS/MLS approaches:
|
|
k. The following minimum radar
and communications equipment must be provided for monitoring simultaneous
approaches:
|
|
1. One separate airport surveillance
radar display of a model currently certified for ATC functions. A
high-resolution, color monitor with alert algorithms, such as the Final
Monitor Aid or that required in the Precision Runway Monitor program, must be
required as follows:
|
|
1. One separate airport surveillance
radar display of a model currently certified for ATC functions. A
high-resolution color monitor with alert algorithms, such as the Final Monitor
Aid or that required in the Precision Runway Monitor program, must be required
as follows:
|
|
(a) At locations where triple
simultaneous approaches are conducted to parallel runways with centerlines
separated by at least 4,300 feet but less than 5,000 feet, and the airport field
elevation is less than 1,000 feet MSL.
|
|
(a) At locations where triple
simultaneous approaches are conducted to parallel runways with centerlines
separated by at least 4,300 feet,
but less than 5,000 feet, and the airport field elevation is less than 1,000
feet MSL.
|
|
(b) At locations where triple
simultaneous approaches are conducted to parallel runways with field elevation
1,000 feet MSL or greater require an approved FAA aeronautical study.
|
|
(b) At locations where triple
simultaneous approaches are conducted to parallel runways with field elevation
1,000 feet MSL or greater require an approved FAA aeronautical study.
|
|
2. Authorize simultaneous ILS/MLS
approaches to parallel dual runways with centerlines separated by 3,000
feet with one
localizer offset by 2.5 degrees using a precision runway monitor system
with a 1.0 second radar update system and, when centerlines are separated
by 3,400 feet when precision runway monitors are utilized with a radar update
rate of 2.4 seconds or less.
|
|
2. Authorize simultaneous close
parallel
approaches to dual runways with centerlines separated by 3,000 feet with one
final approach course offset by 2.5 degrees using a precision runway
monitor system with a 1.0 second radar update system, and when
centerlines are separated by 3,400 feet when precision runway monitors are
utilized with a radar update rate of 2.4 seconds or less.
|
|
3. The common NOZ and NTZ lines
between the final approach course centerlines must be depicted on the radar
video map. The NTZ must be 2,000 feet wide and centered an equal distance from
the final approach centerlines. The remaining spaces between the final approach
courses are the NOZs associated with each course.
|
|
3. The common NOZ and NTZ lines
between the final approach course centerlines must be depicted on the radar
video map. The NTZ must be 2,000 feet wide and centered an equal distance from
the final approach centerlines. The remaining spaces between the final approach
courses are the NOZs associated with each course.
|
|
4. Establish monitor positions for
each final approach course which have override transmit and receive capability
on the appropriate control tower frequencies. A check of the override capability
at each monitor position must be completed before monitoring begins. Monitor
displays must be located in such proximity to permit direct verbal coordination
between monitor controllers. A single display may be used for two monitor
positions.
|
|
4. Establish monitor positions for
each final approach course which have override transmit and receive capability
on the appropriate control tower frequencies. A check of the override capability
at each monitor position must be completed before monitoring begins. Monitor
displays must be located in such proximity to permit direct verbal coordination
between monitor controllers. A single display may be used for two monitor
positions.
|
|
5. Facility directives must define the
position responsible for providing the minimum applicable longitudinal
separation between aircraft on the same final approach course.
|
|
5. Facility directives must define the
position responsible for providing the minimum applicable longitudinal
separation between aircraft on the same final approach course.
|
|
g. Dual local control
positions, while not mandatory, are desirable.
|
|
l. Dual local control
positions, while not mandatory, are desirable.
|
|
Add
|
|
m. Where possible, establish
standard breakout procedures for each simultaneous operation. If traffic
patterns and airspace permit, the standard breakout altitude should be the same
as the missed approach altitude.
|
|
NEW
|
|
|
Appendix 4. Glide Slope Outage Waiver
Request
|
|
Simultaneous ILS With Glide Slope Out
Waiver for Operations After 29 Days
|
|
Submit via Email to:
AJT-2A3
9-AJT-2-HQ-TerminalSafetyAndOperationsSupport@faa.gov
AJS-5
9-AWA-AJS-COR@faa.gov
AOV-120
9-AWA-AVS-AOV-COR@faa.gov
AFS-400
`AFS-460-IFPV@faa.gov
|
|
Section 1
|
|
Facility Identification:
|
|
|
Runway (##) Glide Slope OTS:
|
|
|
Simultaneous Approaches Impacted:
|
|
|
Section 2
|
|
Effective Paragraph(s):
|
□ FAA Order JO 7110.65, 5-9-6
□ FAA Order JO 7110.65, 5-9-7
|
|
Section 3
|
|
Initial Outage Date:
|
|
|
Reason Glide Slope is OTS:
|
|
|
Expected Restoration Date:
|
|
|
Reason outage will be longer than
29 days:
|
|
|
Section 4
|
|
Facility Safety Monitoring:
|
|
Facility Manager must include a narrative of any
issues or problems that have been encountered. This narrative must identify any
new safety requirements/mitigations that the facility implements.
|
|
Section 5
|
|
Impact if Waiver is Not Granted:
|
|
Facility Manager must include a narrative of the
operational impact if continuation of this procedure is not approved.
|
|
Section 6
|
|
Attach a copy of the facility Contingency Plan
for Unplanned Glide Slope Out Procedures.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND
TITLE: 10-4-8. Precision Runway Monitor-Simultaneous
Offset Instrument Approaches
2. BACKGROUND: ATCSCC involvement
was to help identify demand of non-PRM aircraft that may affect arrival rates at
PRM airports. However, these reservation/arrival slot requests were usually
received too far in advance of constraints, such as weather, for the facility or
ATCSCC to identify any delay. Additionally, the number of non-PRM aircraft has
diminished due to advancement in aircraft and aircrew training.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
10-4-8. Precision
runway monitor- simultaneous offset instrument approaches
|
|
10-4-8. Precision runway
monitor- simultaneous offset instrument approaches
|
|
title through a
|
|
No Change
|
|
b. Notification procedures for pilots
unable to accept an ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach clearance have been
established in accordance with Advisory Circular 9098, Simultaneous Closely
Spaced Parallel Operations Airports Using Precision Runway Monitor Systems.
|
|
b. Notification procedures for pilots
unable to accept an ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach clearance can be found on
the Attention All Users Page (AAUP) of the Standard Instrument Approach
Procedures (SIAP) for the specific airport PRM approach.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 17-5-10.
Ntml procedures
2. BACKGROUND: Recent review of
National Traffic Management Log (NTML) procedures specified in FAA Order JO
7210.3, Chapter 17, highlighted a possible misinterpretation of coordination
requirements. To eliminate a misinterpretation that verbal coordination is
required for all TMIs entered into the NTML, the ATCSCC is intiating a change to
remove the word “verbally" in the second line of paragraph 17510b. Situations
requiring verbal coordination are clearly stated in paragraph 17510c.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
17510. NTML PROCEDURES
|
|
17510. NTML PROCEDURES
|
|
title through a
|
|
No Change
|
|
b. TMI data must be entered
utilizing the appropriate template and verbally coordinated with the
appropriate facility. Appropriate template means the one best suited for the
type of event, such as a ground stop, delays, etc. The “Miscellaneous” templates
must not be used if another template is appropriate. The Justification, Remarks,
and Text fields must not contain any information that can be entered in other
fields on the template.
|
|
b. TMI data must be entered
using the appropriate template and coordinated with the appropriate
facility. Appropriate template means the one best suited for the type of event,
such as a ground stop, delays, etc. The “Miscellaneous” templates must not be
used if another template is appropriate. The Justification, Remarks, and Text
fields must not contain any information that can be entered in other fields on
the template.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 17-5-12.
Delay reporting
2. BACKGROUND: FAA Order JO 7210.3,
paragraph 17512d, requires facilities to verbally notify the ATCSCC when
delays reach or are anticipated to reach 90 minutes, except for EDCT delays as a
result of a GDP, but there is no requirement to log that the notification was
made.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
17512. DELAY REPORTING
|
|
17512. DELAY REPORTING
|
|
a through c
|
|
No Change
|
|
d. Facilities must verbally notify the
ATCSCC, through the appropriate protocol, when delays reach or are anticipated
to reach 90 minutes, except for EDCT delays as a result of a GDP. The facility
manager must be notified when delays reach 90 minutes, except for delays as a
result of a GDP.
|
|
d. Facilities must verbally notify the
ATCSCC, through the appropriate protocol, when delays reach or are anticipated
to reach 90 minutes, except for EDCT delays as a result of a GDP.
Facilities must document in their NTML, or daily log if the facility does not
have NTML, that the verbal notification was completed. The ATCSCC must document
in their NTML that the 90minute verbal notification was received. The
facility manager must be notified when delays reach 90 minutes, except for
delays as a result of a GDP.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 17-18-3.
EXPLANATION OF TERMS and
17-18-5. responsibilities
2. BACKGROUND: Scheduled upgrades to
Traffic Flow Management (TFM) system software (referred to as “Release 5/6” or
“R5/6”) introduces new capabilities for TFM equipment to interface with ERAM.
These capabilities are defined by new concepts and terms. Some of these new
capabilities will be available in the TFM system before all En Route Centers are
operating with ERAM. The development of TFM system equipment and software is not
directly related to the development and implementation of ERAM, so the release
schedules cannot be directly connected.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
1718-3. EXPLANATION OF TERMS
|
|
1718-3. EXPLANATION OF TERMS
|
|
title through f
|
|
No Change
|
|
Add
|
|
g. Protected Segment: The
protected segment is a segment on the amended TFM route that is to be inhibited
from automatic adapted route alteration by ERAM.
|
|
Add
|
|
h. Protected Segment Indicator:
The protected area will be coded on the display and strips using the examples in
TBL 17181.
|
|
Add
|
|
i. TMI Indicator: This denotes
protected coding exists for a flight's route even though the coding within the
route may be scrolled off the view surface.
|
|
Add
|
|
j. TMI Identifier: Identifies
the name of the initiative and is inserted into the beginning of Interfacility
Remarks after the clear weather symbol.
|
|
NEW
|
|
|
TBL 17-18-1
Example of Protected Segment Indicators
|
|
Presentation
|
Character Used
|
Example
|
|
Display
|
Bracketing chevrons ><
|
ILM..FAK..J109.>LEONI.J110.IHD.J518.DJB<..DTW
|
|
Enroute Flight Strip
|
Reverse bracketing parentheses )(
|
ILM FAK J109 )LEONI J110 IHD J518 DJB( DTW
|
|
TBL 17-18-1
|
|
Renumber TBL 17-18-2.
|
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
1718-5. RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
1718-5. RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
b. Field Facilities must:
|
|
b. Field facilities
must:
|
|
b1 through b5
|
|
No Change
|
|
Add
|
|
6. Not amend flight plans for
flights outside their area of jurisdiction without prior approval.
|
1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE:
17-23-1. Purpose
17-23-2. definition
17-23-3. policy, and
17-23-4. responsibilities
2. BACKGROUND: Throughout the
National Airspace System (NAS), traffic management personnel conduct route tests
to assess new routing concepts, explore alternative routing possibilities, and
develop new routes to reduce delays and enhance system safety and efficiency.
Route tests require established pre-coordination practices to ensure all
affected parties can evaluate the impact, comment on the concepts, and
participate. Route tests can vary in duration, usually 90 days. There are no
current national directives establishing this practice.
3. CHANGE:
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
Add
|
|
Section 23. Route Test
|
|
Add
|
|
1723-1. PURPOSE
|
|
Add
|
|
This section describes policies and
guidelines for conducting and evaluating route tests.
|
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
Add
|
|
1723-2. DEFINITION
|
|
Add
|
|
a. Route test a process
established for the purpose of:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Assessing new routing
concepts.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. Exploring alternative routing
possibilities.
|
|
Add
|
|
3. Developing new routes to enhance
system efficiency and safety.
|
|
Add
|
|
b. Route test will:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Last for a predetermined
length of time, usually 90 days.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. Include, but not be limited to,
the following NAS elements:
|
|
Add
|
|
(a) NRS waypoints.
|
|
Add
|
|
(b) RNAV waypoints.
|
|
Add
|
|
(c) NAVAIDs.
|
|
Add
|
|
(d) Departure Procedures (DP).
|
|
Add
|
|
(e) Standard Terminal Arrival
Routes (STAR).
|
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
Add
|
|
1723-3. POLICY
|
|
Add
|
|
Route tests must be conducted only
after collaboration and coordination between the ATCSCC, affected en route and
terminal facilities, and stakeholders. Route tests will include existing
certified NAS elements. The ATCSCC is the final approval authority for all route
tests.
|
|
OLD
|
|
NEW
|
|
Add
|
|
1723-4. RESPONSIBILITIES
|
|
Add
|
|
a. The requesting
facility must:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Ensure coordination is
accomplished with all affected FAA facilities and stakeholders.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. Submit a formal letter, in
memorandum format, to the ATCSCC Procedures Office, through the regional MTO.
The memorandum must include:
|
|
Add
|
|
(a) Detailed summary of the
route test being requested and the anticipated results.
|
|
Add
|
|
(b) List of affected FAA
facilities and stakeholders with which coordination has been completed.
|
|
Add
|
|
(c) Length of time for which the
route test will be in effect, not to exceed 180 days.
|
|
Add
|
|
(d) Detailed summary of the
possible impact to the NAS, surrounding facilities, and stakeholders.
|
|
Add
|
|
3. Perform an air traffic safety
analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1100.161, Air Traffic Safety Oversight.
|
|
Add
|
|
4. After the above items have
been completed and the test approved, conduct the test as requested.
|
|
Add
|
|
5. Determine if the route test
timeframe is adequate. A facility may be granted an extension of up to 90 days
with the approval of the ATCSCC. Submit requests for extension through the MTO
to the ATCSCC Procedures Office, with supporting documentation. Facilities
requesting extensions exceeding 180 days must review and comply with FAA Order
1050.1, Policies and Procedures Considering Environmental Impacts, to ensure
environ- mental studies are completed. Include the studies with your request.
|
|
Add
|
|
6. Within 30 days of completion
of the test:
|
|
Add
|
|
(a) Conduct a review and
analysis with the stakeholders and accept comments.
|
|
Add
|
|
(b) Determine if the proposed
route is viable or if other alternatives should be explored.
|
|
Add
|
|
(c) Document test results and
prepare a posttest report in accordance with Air Traffic Safety Analysis and
with FAA Order 1100.161, Air Traffic Safety Oversight.
|
|
Add
|
|
7. If the route is determined to
be beneficial, initiate implementation and have the route published in
appropriate charts, databases, letters of agreement, and any other appropriate
FAA publications.
|
|
Add
|
|
b. The ATCSCC must:
|
|
Add
|
|
1. Review the route test
memorandum and approve the test or provide justification for disapproval.
|
|
Add
|
|
2. Review and approve requests
for test extensions or provide justification for disapproval.
|
|
Add
|
|
3. Issue any necessary traffic
management advisories.
|
|
Add
|
|
4. Be the approving authority
for any TMIs requested in association with the route test.
|
|