U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
Air Traffic Organization Policy

ORDER
JO 7210.3X
Effective Date:
February 9, 2012
 
     
Subject:  Facility Operation and Administration
       Includes:  Errata effective 2/9/12, Change 1 effective 7/26/12, Change 2 effective 3/7/13, and Change 3 effective 8/22/13
 
 

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.

 

OLD

Add

                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.

 

                                                   OLD

                                                    Add

                                                                 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.


Return to Air Traffic Publications Library Return to Order Home Page Return to Table of Contents