Applications and Petitions: None Answers and Replies: ADSB Out Performance Requirements - Comments of ACI-NA, ACSS, AEA/IATA, ALPA, ALPA-I, Boeing,Delta, DOD, FedEx Express, NACA, NBAA, IATA and United Policy Regarding Airport Rates and Charges - Comments of County of Rockland, NY / Letter Requesting Withdrawal of Rockland County Comments Orders and Notices: None Rules and Regulations: None Grant of Petitions: None

	ADSB Out Performance Requirements to Support ATC FAA-2007-29305 February 29, 2008 Comments of Air Line Pilots Association ALPA is concerned that the lack of a planned mandate or timeline for ADS-B In is not addressed in the NPRM. The FAA states that “NextGen will be an aircraft-centric system” and that NextGen will “vastly improve situational awareness”. Further, ALPA agrees that ADS-B In will enable “… applications such as aircraft merging and spacing, and self-separation. These applications are enabled by having aircraft identify each other on the same data link without the need to employ ADS-R, which would increase the latency of the transmission”. However, ALPA believes that the full realization of increased capacity and enhanced safety can not be realized until “ADS-B In” (i.e. information received by the aircraft on other aircraft positions) equipage is also mandated for operations at designated locations, routes, and altitudes. Therefore, it is imperative that the FAA include a requirement for ADS-B In and a timeline for implementation as a part of this ADS-B rule. By: ALPA, Brian Townsend February 29, 2008 Air Line Pilots Association, International ALPA is concerned that the lack of a planned mandate or timeline for ADS-B In is not addressed in the NPRM. The FAA states that “NextGen will be an aircraft-centric system” and that NextGen will “vastly improve situational awareness”. Further, ALPA agrees that ADS-B In will enable “… applications such as aircraft merging and spacing, and self-separation. These applications are enabled by having aircraft identify each other on the same data link without the need to employ ADS-R, which would increase the latency of the transmission”. However, ALPA believes that the full realization of increased capacity and enhanced safety can not be realized until “ADS-B In” (i.e. information received by the aircraft on other aircraft positions) equipage is also mandated for operations at designated locations, routes, and altitudes. Therefore, it is imperative that the FAA include a requirement for ADS-B In and a timeline for implementation as a part of this ADS-B rule. By: ALPA, Brian Townsend February , 2008 Comments of The Air Transport Association of America Commercial transport operators certainly are interested in technology that could improve the capacity and efficiency of the NAS. ADS-B technology is the most promising foundation for NextGen and its goals of improving NAS performance while accommodating a three-fold growth in traffic. Our recommended program and actions can accelerate the implementation of ADS-B Out and instill confidence in an FAA-industry development program while avoiding premature and overly-optimistic commitments and investments. By: Basil Barimo, 202-626-4000 February , 2008 Comments of Airports Council International - North America We wish to express a general concern that the ADS-B/Out performance requirements of this NPRM fail to identify any specific operational advantage. The vague references to benefits that will be realized at some future, unspecified time resulting from a future voluntary installation ofADS-B/In will not provide sufficient fmancial and operational justification to motivate aircraft operators to equip. There is a very real risk that the much needed capacity improvements cited in the NPRM will not be accomplished unless specific improvements in operational capabilities will result from this proposed rule. In our view, that will require the integrated treatment of both ADS-B/Out and ADS-B/In, along with identification ofthe associated revised air traffic procedures that will accomplish the needed capacity improvement. It is our view that adoption ofthis rule at this time is premature. Rather than proceed with an incomplete and hastily developed rulemaking proposal, we urge you to address the many comments filed in the docket and re-issue a supplemental notice ofproposed rulemaking addressing these important concerns. By: Gregory Principato February 29, 2008 Comments of the Association of European Airlines/International Air Transport Association IATA/AEA are opposed to WAAS as it is not a global solution and does not provide suitable operational benefit to justify its use by International Air Transport. Airlines have invested and are continuing to invest in aircraft augmentation systems that are global and offer comparable benefits at a reduced cost. IATA / AEA strongly recommend the internationally accepted Mode S 1090 MHz ES for all traffic at all levels, in line with our ADS-B out policy, and oppose to a double ADS-B data communication link standard. By: AEA/IATA February 29, 2008 Comments of Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems | Word The NPRM states that “Terminal area and surface applications such as Final Approach and Runway Occupancy Awareness would not be enabled unless all aircraft in the surface environment report their position accurately on runways and taxiways (NACp equal to or greater than 9).”  This wording suggests that if there were 100 aircraft around a given airport and one of those aircraft was not reporting an accurate position then functions like FAROA would be turned off on all 100 aircraft.  This does not seem like the best alternative.  In this example, it would be better if the 99 aircraft with sufficiently good position accuracy continued to provide the FAROA function, with FAROA showing the position of the other 98 aircraft which were reporting good positional accuracy.  It would only be necessary to turn off FAROA on the one aircraft that did not have accurate position information.  This would be analogous to present day TCAS systems which continue to operate even though there may be an aircraft in the vicinity with a failed transponder. The TCAS on all the aircraft with functioning transponders continue to work; TCAS is only failed on the aircraft with the failed transponder. By: ACSS February , 2008 Comments of Boeing The emphasis of the NPRM and also the NextGen future concept seems to be on specifying enhanced technology and performance capabilities for the future aircraft fleet.  It is doubtful that simply replacing Comm/ Nav/ Surveillance capabilities aboard aircraft and in corresponding ATC systems with enhanced performance will accomplish the ambitious goals for increased traffic capacity, efficiency, and system growth without substantial improvements in ground system automation. The NPRM only addresses traditional surveillance applications for ADS-B Out and associated performance requirements.  Expanding NAS system capacity is likely to require major changes in ATM system automation functionality and to requirements for air-ground data communication which are scarcely addressed in this NPRM. In addition, the position performance requirements for ADS-B surveillance specified in this NPRM are different from the performance requirements for navigation within the NAS.  Position performance requirements for ADS-B are being developed without recognition of existing navigation capabilities. Requirements for navigation and surveillance need to be derived in a coordinated, not isolated, process that will not unnecessarily drive up cost. By: Daniel Mooney February 25, 2008 Comments of Delta Air Lines DAL supports preferential, not exclusionary airspace, for aircraft equipped with ADS-B. Even though operators may want to equip, there could be delay in parts availability due to the high demand, forcing airlines to operate non-ADS-B capable. Airlines should not be performance penalized for this. Conversely, if an operator has equipped, they should be able to take part in a benefit, if available. By: Delta February 29, 2008 Comments of the Department of Defense Multilateration is less costly than equipping for ADS-B since it requires no addition or modification to the aircraft and much less costly than a traditional radar. Several international civil aviation authorities are already replacing secondary radar with multilateration in both wide and terminal serveillance areas. DoD would like to see justification for statements used to support this analysis. By: Gerald Pease March 2, 2008 Comments of FedEx Express FedEx requests that the FAA reconsider the ADS-B Out mandate until ADS-B Out is evaluated with the ADS-B Out ground infrastructure scheduled for 2013. FedEx requests that the FAA provide financial incentives for the airline industry to accelerate the equipage of a number of aircraft with ADS-B Out and evaluate the system soon after 2013. A fully integrated evaluation will help the industry identify the benefits of ADS-B Out and evaluate the latency of equipment available for ADS-B Out. By: FedEx Express September 4, 2007 Comments of the International Air Transport Association Where justified by operational and business cases, air traffic control using ground radar surveillance should migrate towards ADS-B (OUT). In airspace where ADS-B OUT is declared operational, associated radar installations should be decommissioned as soon as operationally feasible and the resulting maintenance and operational savings passed on to airspace users. By: IATA February , 2008 Comments of National Air Carrier Association We are concerned that the agency’s 2020 timeframe for implementation of ADS-B Out technology may be too aggressive. While we share the concerns about moving expeditiously to address the growing capacity and efficiency needs of the NAS, we are concerned that this timeframe must take into account the overall economic condition in which our carriers are operating. At a minimum, the agency believes that the total costs for complying with this rule are $1.27 billion, and the industry will begin incurring these costs as early as 2012. This is a significant sum for an industry that is struggling to obtain some level of profitability as fuel costs continue to rise to record levels. For a number of our carriers, there will be a need to analyze the costs for retrofitting their current fleet of aircraft with the proposed ADS-B Out technology, or await the acquisition of newer aircraft and equip those aircraft with the proposed technology. Our carriers’ timeframes for fleet modernization are largely affected by the timelines of the airframe manufacturers. For instance, if the delivery date of a new aircraft is greatly delayed, this, in turn, affects our carriers’ abilities to modernize. This will significantly affect the decision-making process in moving forward with ADS-B Out deployment. We would respectfully urge the FAA to consider more flexibility for carriers in making the transition to ADS-B Out beyond the proposed 2020 timeframe. Counsel: Edward Faberman, 202-719-7420, epfaberman@acaa1.com for ACAA and Thomas Zoeller, 703-358-8065, tzoeller@naca.cc for NACA March 3, 2008 Comments of the National Business Aviation Association NBAA believes the FAA should develop a tool for operators to assess the benefits of both early equipage and when full equipage is required by the mandate. This tool would allow an operator to evaluate early equipage in the context of existing equipage. Assuming operators have a long lead time to equip their aircraft, they would be able to examine various equipage strategies. This approach could be tailored to an operator’s specific environment and needs, taking local constraints into account. Typically, in a mandate situation, the only additional cost for early equipage is the cost of money. The decision tool would be similar in form and function to the European Model for Strategic ATM Investment Analysis. The EMOSIA is generic to cover any change in the air traffic management environment. The ADS–B tool would be specific to ADS–B equipage, but should still provide targeted input to an array of stakeholders and use a full scope of possible cost and benefits to arrive at a net present value of different levels of ADS–B equipage. By: Ed Bolen February 29, 2008 Comments of United Air Lines | Word The compliance date for this NPRM for operations above FL240 should be moved up to 2015.  The net present value of costs and benefits to operators would increase by over $215 Million with a 2015 compliance date.  This NPRM should include a Part 25 requirement for new aircraft to be compliant with ADS-B Out, meeting the requirements of TSO-C166A by 2011. The performance requirements specified in this NPRM should be adjusted.  The highest required NACp should be 8.  The rule should be amended at a later date if a business case can be established for applications requiring a NACp of 9.  If a valid requirement is established for a NACp of 9, the rule should not implement the requirement for a NACp of 9 until the Department of Defense can provide the FAA a commitment that the minimum number of GPS satellites will be 27 plus adequate spares.  We prefer a commitment of 30 plus spares. By: United, Joe Burns, 303-780-5178, joe.burns@united.com Index Policy Regarding Airport Rates and Charges FAA-2008-0036 February 29, 2008 Re: Comments of the County of Rockland, New York Rockland County does not believe the current version of the Airspace Redesign has been properly decided. The County feels that other options should be considered first, and consequently supports whatever congestion pricing policy will most reduce flight delays and obviate the need for the Airspace Redesign. Rockland County submits that the FAA is being inconsistent in its treatment of congestion management. The Agency's decision to propose a change to its policy to allow the use of congestion pricing validates the County's position that congestion management is a viable alternative to address safety and efficiency issues and might have led to a plan that would not have the same severe environmental effects as the one adopted. The County strongly urges the FAA to prepare a SETS that thoroughly evaluates such a marketbased approach as an alternative to the Airspace Redesign plan that was approved to alleviate flight delays. Counsel: Holland & Knight, Lawrence Liebesman, 202-419-2477 March 3, 2008 Re: Withdrawal of Comments Our February 29, 2008 comments were submitted in error by Holland & Knight. We respectfully ask that they be withdrawn from the public record. Counsel: Holland & Knight, Lawrence Liebesman, 202-419-2477 Index