Organizational analysis report of the Aeronautics Division, Arizona Department of Transportation

              GV80,2: 061
COpy 2
Office for Excellence rn Government
Organizational Analysis Report
of the
Aeronautics Division
Arizona
Department of Transportation
June 1994
STATE OF ARIZONA
EXECUTIVE OFFICE
OFFICE FOR EXCELLENCE IN GOVERNMENT
FIFE SYMINGTON
Governor
June 20, 1994
Mr. Larry Bonine
Director
Arizona Department of Transportation
206 South 17th Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Dear Mr. Bonine:
TIMOTHY L. BONCOSKEY
Director
The Governor's Office For Excellence In Government's Organizational Analysis Team has completed its review
of the Arizona Department ofTransportation Aeronautics Division, and we are pleased to present to you our report
of findings and recommendations. Our review was conducted from February, 1994, through April, 1994.
In total, the team made three formal recommendations that included 34 " bullet- point" areas of potential improve­ment.
The first recommendation concerns policy issues related to the Grand Canyon Airport, while the other two
recommendations address operations issues at the airport and at the Phoenix headquarters. Although we found no
easily quantifiable cost savings in the Aeronautics Division, we are convinced that cost avoidance savings will
occur as a result of increased morale and productivity resulting from the successful implementation of these
recommendations.
Once again, I thank you and all of the ADOT staff who assisted the team in this effort, and I look forward to a
continuation of the successful relationship with ADOT as we begin the Administrative Services Division study.
---.--
1700 WEST WASHINGTON, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 • ( 602) 542- 4331
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
206 South Seventeenth Avenue - Phoenix, Arizona 85007- 3213
Phone: ( 602) 255- 7226 - FAX: ( 602) 255- 6941
FIFE SYMINGTON
Governor
June 21, 1994
Mr. Tim Boncoskey, Director
Governor's Office for Excellence
1700 West Washington, Suite 300
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Dear Mr. Boncoskey:
LARRY S. BONINE
~} rector
We have reviewed the SLIM report for the Aeronautics Division and accept the findings
and recommendations that have been detailed by your staff. Mr. Marcum and his team
should be commended for their efforts and their willingness to work with our staff on
some very challenging issues.
We look forward to the improvements that will come about in the Aeronautics Division as
a result of the SLIM recommendations and our own Quality and Productivity Initiative.
Ultimately, they will help us provide better customer service to the people of Arizona.
Sincerely,
qp
Continuous improvement is our way of life
HIGHWAYS AERONAUTICS MOTOR VEHICLE PUBLIC TRANSIT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
TABLE of CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii
I. GRAND CANYON AIRPORT POLICY ISSUES
• Grand Canyon National Park Airport - Overview 2
• Airport Oassification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
• Terminal Complex 5
• General Aviation Facilities 7
• Airport Support Facilities 8
• Demand Forecast 10
• Future Airport Development Issues 13
• Principal Finding 14
• Possible Future Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15
• Recommendation 18
Appoint a Grand Canyon Airport Commission 18
II. GRAND CANYON AIRPORT OPERATIONS ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19
III. PHOENIX OPERATIONS ISSUES 21
i
TABLE of CONTENTS
TABLE 1
GCN - Historical Airport Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
TABLE 2
GCN - Capital Improvement Program 13
TABLE 3
GCN - Revenue and Expenditures by Fiscal Year ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15
IV. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
GCN - Existing Airfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
APPENDIXB
GCN - Navigational Aids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
APPENDIX C
GCN - Lighting and Marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
APPENDIXD
GCN - Apron And Tiedown Area 26
APPENDIX E
GCN - Fuel Storage Facilities 27
APPENDIX F
GCN - Glossary of Aviation Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Governor's Office For Excellence In Government ( OEG) initiated a review of the
Arizona Department of Transportation ( ADOT) Aeronautics Division in February, 1994.
The review of the Division was conducted by a three person OEG Organizational Analysis
Team and was completed in April, 1994. This summary describes the objectives of the
review, the methodology used during the analysis, and the recommendations made as a
result of the effort.
In total, three formal recommendations that include 34 " bullet- point" recommendations were
written. The first recommendation contains strategic policy issues related to the division's
management of the Grand Canyon Airport Facility. The second recommendation suggests
a formal " partnering" session be conducted to address operations issues at the Grand
Canyon Airport. It also suggests moving the ADOT employee housing facility at the airport
to minimize the negative safety and quality of life impacts of planned helicopter operations
near the current facility. The third recommendation calls for another formal " partnering"
session to address operation issues at the division headquarters in Phoenix.
A fourth recommendation was discussed which concerned decentralizing the division's major
functions to the appropriate process owners within ADOT, calling for the division to be
managed horizontally in a project management style. It is felt this would increase the
impact of the division through enhanced economies of scale and physical locations. It was
mutually agreed upon that it would be more appropriate to address this recommendation
when the team is in the Director's office studying ADOT strategic issues.
OBJECTIVES AND GOALS
The overall objective of the OEG review was to evaluate the Aeronautics Division using
organizational analysis and Total Quality Management ( TQM) techniques, identifying areas
where improvements could be made in the delivery of the division's services. The goals
were to streamline processes; improve systems and procedures; eliminate re- work and
unnecessary work; and to re- align groups with related functions.
iii
METHODOLOGY
The approach used in this study was to take an integrated view of the division, studying the
following variables in each of the areas reviewed:
- leadership
- mission
- strategic focus
- process flows
- technological support
- information management
- organizational performance measurements
- quality and service levels ( customer orientation)
- organizational structure
- logistics and physical assets
The analysis began with the team studying " shelf data" provided by the division, to become
familiar with its mission, size, structure, and responsibilities. Next, an informal " partnering"
session was held involving the OEG team and Aeronautics management. The purpose of the
partnering session was to identify mutual expectations for the review, and to adopt an
issue/ conflict resolution procedure. The next phase was an extensive interviewing process
aimed at all Aeronautics employees, ADOT management, and Aeronautics Division
customers and constituents. The purpose of this activity was to identify potential areas for
improvement within the division.
As issues were identified, meetings were scheduled with Aeronautics management and staff
in an effort to reach consensus regarding issues on which the OEG team would focus its
efforts. Those ultimately receiving such consensus were developed into the three formal
recommendations contained in this document.
iv
GRAND CANYON AIRPORT POLICY ISSUES
I. GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK AIRPORT •• AN OVERVIEW
Acknowled2ement
Most of the background information contained in pages 2- 12, the tables, and exhibits
of this recommendation have been taken from the very detailed Master Plan for the
Grand Canyon National Park Airport, prepared by Gilbertson Associates, Inc. and
Coffman Associates, Inc. in January of 1991. ( Note: In some cases, updated factual
information and/ or modified data has been addended to the narrative, tables and
exhibits within the background section of this recommendation, to reflect activities or
changes that have taken place since the time the Master Plan was originally issued three
years ago.)
Locale
Grand Canyon National Park Airport ( hereinafter referred to by its three- letter FAA
designation of " GCN") is located in the Kaibab National Forest, just south of the
unincorporated limits of Tusayan, six miles south of Grand Canyon National Park in
northern Arizona. GCN is the third busiest air carrier airport in the state behind
Phoenix and Tucson. The airport had 186,000 operations and over 535,000 passengers
in 1993.
GCN is located approximately 81 miles north of Flagstaff, 146 miles southwest of Page
and 60 miles north of Williams in Arizona. The major population centers are Las
Vegas, Nevada, approximately 273 miles northwest; Phoenix, Arizona, 226 miles south;
and Salt Lake City, Utah, approximately 419 miles north.
History
The United States Department of Agriculture conveyed the deed for the airport property
to the State of Arizona in 1967 ( from land controlled by the United States Forest
Service) through Section 16 of the Federal Airport Act of 1946, as amended by the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958. The airport property is surrounded on three sides ( south,
east and west) by the Kaibab National Forest and on the north by the unincorporated
town of Tusayan.
In 1967, initial airport construction consisted of a 5,800 foot by 150 foot runway and a
75 foot wide parallel taxiway, equipped with Medium Intensity Runway lights, a small
aircraft parking apron, and access road to the airport from Arizona Highway 64. In
1968, the general aviation parking apron was expanded to 28,600 square yards and the
Tel11ilnal Building was COllStructcd. A major increase in airport capabilitjr occurred in
1972 when the runway and parallel taxiway were extended to a length of 9,000 feet.
1
In 1973, a building was constructed to contain the airport's Aircraft Rescue and
Firefighting Equipment ( ARFF). In 1974 and again in 1977, the aircraft parking apron
was expanded. The Instrument Landing System ( ILS) and Medium Intensity and
Approach Lighting ( MALSR) were installed during the period 1979- 1982. In 1986- 87,
the aircraft parking apron was further expanded to its present size of 91,800 square
yards.
EXISTING AIRPORT FACILITIES
This section presents a description of the existing facilities at the Grand Canyon National
Park Airport.
Airport Classification
The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems ( NPIAS) classifies an airport in one
of five categories based upon the airport's service level. The service level also
determines the funding category ( determined by Congress) of the airport to assist in
airport development.
The GCN is classified as a Primary Commercial Service airport, defined as a "... public
airport which ... enplanes 10,000 passengers or more and receives scheduled passenger
service." Furthermore, GCN is sub classified as a Small commercial service airport as
the annual enplanements are between 184,000 and 920,000 passengers. The NPIAS
forecasts that the airport will remain in this classification throughout the NPIAS
planning period ( 1986- 1995).
The size of the airport property is approximately 858 acres. The airport's elevation is
6,606 feet above Mean Sea Level ( MSL) and the airport is certificated under Federal
Aviation Regulation Part 139.
Airfield Facilities. Airfield facilities at GCN include runways, taxiways, aprons, airfield
lighting and navigational aids. It should be noted that GCN is not equipped with an
Airport Surveillance Radar ( italics added).
Runways. The airport is presently served by a single runway, 03- 21, which is 8,999 feet
by 150 feet and constructed of asphaltic concrete. The runway bearing strength is 88,000
pounds single wheel loading ( SWL), 108,000 pounds dual wheel loading ( DWL) and
160,000 pounds dual tandem wheel ( DTW) loading. The runway gradient is 0.84 percent
sloping to the southwest.
The instrument approaches available to Runway 03- 21 are a precision instrument
approach and a Very High Frequency Omni- range ( VOR) nonprecision approach to
Runway 03. There are no instrument approaches available to Runway 21.
2
Taxiways. A parallel taxiway, located 400 feet east of runway centerline, is 75 feet in
width. In order to provide adequate parking area for aircraft, a portion of this taxiway
is classified as a " taxilane" in order to achieve maximum available ramp space for parking
aircraft. Like the runway, the taxiway is also constructed of asphaltic concrete. There
are also six stub taxiways which connect the runway to the taxiway/ apron. These taxiways
are constructed with asphaltic concrete and are 75 feet in width. The major
characteristics of the runway/ taxiways are illustrated in Appendix A.
Navigational Aids. Ground- based electronic navigational aids are functionally described
as either Enroute Navigational Aids ( navaids that serve as a point- to- point navigational
device and/ or as part of a federally approved airway system) or Terminal Navigational
Aids ( navaids that assist in the approach- to- Ianding phase of flight and are part of a
published instrument approach procedure). Some navaids serve both enroute and
terminal roles in the FAA airway/ airspace system.
Enroute Navigational Aids. Enroute navigational aids permit pilots to navigate through
the airspace from their point of origin to final destination dependant upon the
navigational equipment in the aircraft. The Grand Canyon VOR/ DME, a Very High
Frequency Omni- directional azimuth transmitter combined with Distance Measuring
Equipment is located west of the runway near the Air Traffic Control Tower. The
Grand Canyon VOR/ DME serves as both an enroute and terminal navaid, providing
azimuth and range information from the VOR/ DME to the pilot.
The VOR/ DME serves in the VOR and Low/ Medium Frequency ( UMF) Airway System
to provide point- to- point guidance along airways V- 257, V- 210, and V- 293. The Grand
Canyon VOR/ DME also serves as a terminal navaid providing azimuth information for
a non- precision instrument approach to Runway 03 and 21.
Terminal Navigational Aids. Terminal navaids are normally used in conjunction with an
instrument approach procedure to provide the pilot assistance in landing at the airport
in poor weather conditions or for practicing for such an occasion.
The Precision Instrument Landing System ( ILS). A navaid that provides both azimuth,
distance and glideslope information to the pilot, is available to Runway 03. This system
is a Category IlLS, allowing approaches to a landing whenever the weather conditions
permit a ceiling of 200 feet or greater and/ or visibilities of one- half mile or greater.
The system provides four functions: vertical guidance provided by a glideslope beacon,
horizontal guidance provided by a localizer beacon, distance furnished by marker
beacons ( such as middle markers and outer markers and/ or DME) and visual alignment
supplied by the approach lighting system.
- -, = '=-'- """"" .-"!' 0 ~. "! I'. "./'" . . . .. t!. _. ,. __ . ~ !.__ ~ .~. ~.~~ - l. c.- --. _. "_.. ' 0 Marker lJeacons. tleacons mat serve to luem. uy a panlculal pollU. ill : space cuong an
approach ( such as the decision point in the ILS approach where the pilot must obseIVe
3
the runway visually or discontinue the approach), are normally located along the U. s
course to a particular runway. The Middle Marker ( MM) beacon is located near the
end of Runway 03 to identify one- half nautical mile distance to the runway end on the
U. s approach. Aircraft equipped with U. s receivers will receive an audio two- letter
morse code signal as well as visual light indication, when the aircraft passes over the
beacon.
VISlUlI Approach Slope Indicators ( VASI). Visual Approach Slope Indicators are installed
on Runway 21. A VASI provides visual approach slope information to the pilot through
a system of lights which can be observed up to a distance of four miles from an airport.
The approach slope angle for the VASI at GCN is 3 degrees above horizontal.
Surveillance Radars. Surveillance Radars are used to assist pilots in enroute navigation
and as an expeditious method of handling terminal area traffic and/ or as a final approach
aid in a non- precision instrument approach. At the present time, air traffic transiting
south from Dragon and Zuni corridors, converge at a point northeast of the airport and
request landing instructions. At this same point, departures from Runway 03 are
climbing enroute to their assigned flight plans and cannot be observed by radar until they
reach 9,000 feet MSL ( italics added). Aircraft approaching the airport are sequenced by
a flow control position in the tower.
Lighting and Marking. A variety of lighting aids are found at GCN to facilitate
identification, approach, landing and taxiing operations at night and in adverse weather
conditions. These systems are categorized by function and are listed in Appendix B.
Tenninal Complex
The Terminal Facilities include the Terminal Building, Apron and Tiedown areas, hangars,
Air Traffic Control Tower and other government facilities, Support Facilities and Utilities.
Terminal Building. Terminal Building Facilities at GCN include the major components
of the passenger terminal system: access and processing. The terminal building is the
facility which is the focal point for passengers travelling to and from GCN. It serves not
only the commercial and general aviation passenger but also the tourists and visitors as
well. The initial impact or impression of the airport on the passenger is normally made
by the Terminal Building. Therefore, the facility is important not only with regards to
its function on the airport but for its aesthetic impact on travellers as well.
Terminal Access. Vehicular access to the airport terminal consists of two entrance roads
connecting the terminal area with Arizona Highway 64. This road loops into a parking
lot adjacent to the terminal. All paved parking is designated for customers of the
terminal building, rental cars or buses/ vans. There is an unpaved long term/ employee
parking facility southeast of the terminal.
4
Enplflning/ Deplflning Curb. The lanes in front of the terminal provide approximately 250
linear feet of uncovered, enplaning/ deplaning curb length. The curb is used for both
passenger pick- up and drop- off. The parking area for commercial vehicles ( vans, buses,
etc.) is in the parking lot opposite the main entrance to the terminal.
Automobile Parking. The paved parking lot can accommodate up to 160 cars and 40
buses and motor homes. The parking lot south of the terminal building contains parking
for 28 automobiles and handicapped parking.
Passenger Processing. The next component in the terminal element is that of processing
the enplaning ( departing) passenger. This consists of ticketing, baggage handling,
circulation area, security screening, waiting and ancillary services ( restaurant,
convenience, gift shop and telephones).
Ticketing. There are many airlines that operate at the airport, some who reseIVe space
in the terminal and others that do not. Scheduled airlines who occupy space facilities
are Scenic Airlines and Air Nevada, Air Vegas, Grand AiIWays, Eagle Canyon Airlines,
Canyon/ Windrock, AirStar, Kenai, and Grand Canyon Helicopters.
Baggage Handling. Pass through baggage handling is available at the Scenic Airlines and
Air Nevada ticket counters. There are no curbside baggage handling facilities at the
airport. The baggage makeup area for Scenic Airlines, and Air Nevada is located
immediately behind the respective airline ticket counter. Baggage is then placed on a
transporter and delivered to the aircraft. Baggage is retrieved from an arriving aircraft
in much the same manner and either transported to the Baggage aaim area or to the
airline, where it is picked up by the passenger.
Circulfltion. The terminal building has only ground level loading design capability and
the baggage cart access roadway is located on the apron side of the apron/ gate area.
The majority of passengers arriving from or departing for their flights, pass through a
single set of doors in the center of the terminal. Most passengers travel to and from the
terminal to the Park by tour bus or van.
Corridors vary in width from 8 to 14 feet throughout the terminal, with the smallest
corridor width serving deplaning/ enplaning passengers to Gate 2 at the south end of the
terminal building.
For deplaning passengers, two exits provide access to the baggage claim area. The 8
foot corridor widths are the same at both exits. The passenger, upon retrieving baggage
at the outdoor baggage claim facility, must re- enter the terminal in order to obtain the
services of a rental car agency, bus or other means of ground transportation. The
signage in the terminal building is adequate. A gift shop and concession area operated
'!! -"' I! .~_ ~ 11 • 11 1''' ...,. - l- .! _ ~ 1__ T _'!- 1 ~_.: t ~,"{ 7~~~! _ T. c 7 oy tDe gUt SDOp peISonnel IS lOcaLeu aUJacellL LO we J... AJuuy i: lllU VY cuung J. A) ungc.
Telephones are also located in the lobby.
5
Public rest room facilities are located at the south end of the building. Interviews with
GCN staff confirm the fact that restroom capacity is not satisfactory during peak tourist
periods. Employee restrooms are located on either side of the south exit to the baggage
claim area.
Rental car agencies are located in the north end of the terminal building, as well as
transportation service agencies.
Mechanical/ Equipment rooms and corridors combine to make up the additional area of
the terminal building.
Apron and Tiedown Areas. There is one large apron area on GCN, which accommodates
all scheduled and unscheduled airline activity as well as general aviation aircraft. The
main apron is divided into three parts for ease of description: the General Aviation
Apron, the Air Carrier Apron and the South Apron.
The main apron was constructed of asphaltic concrete in several stages. The original Air
Carrier apron, approximately 14,000 square yards, was constructed with the initial runway
( 5,800 feet x 150 feet) in 1965- 1967. The General Aviation apron, approximately 14,500
square yards, was added in 1968. In 1974, the Air Carrier apron was expanded to the
south by about 16,000 square yards. An apron expansion ( south apron) took place in
1986- 87 with 51,000 additional square yards of apron constructed south of the Air
Carrier apron, and another in 91- 92 that added 10,000 square yards.
Due to the low volume of based aircraft, all the Air Carrier and South apron tiedowns
are considered transient tiedowns. The local tiedowns are on the General aviation apron
and they are managed by the Fixed Base Operator ( FBO) Grand Canyon Airlines.
Appendix D describes the pertinent facts about each of the apron areas.
General Aviation Facilities
General aviation facilities include apron and tiedown areas, hangars, fixed based operators,
and fuel storage.
General Aviation Hangars. There is only one conventional hangar, a large 10,000 square
foot hangar owned and operated by the FBO, Grand Canyon Airlines. There are
presently no shade or T- hangars on the airport.
Fixed Base Operations. Grand Canyon Airlines is the only fixed base operator ( FBO) at
the airport. The FBO provides small aircraft and DeHavilland airframe repair, engine
and some propeller and avionics repair. The FBO performs annual aircraft inspections,
charter service, transient tiedown services and provides all the fuel service on the airport.
6
The FBO maintains an 8,384 square foot terminal building, constructed in 1977, with
more than adequate pilot facilities. This building also accommodates the Grand Canyon
Airlines Tour operations.
Fuel Storage Facilities. Grand Canyon Airlines stores and provides fuel to aircraft at the
airport. The fuel storage facility contains eight underground storage tanks located at the
north end of the airport, adjacent to Taxiway A. Three 12,000 gallon tanks store Jet A
fuel and two 12,000 gallon tanks store 100 Low Lead fuel. One 8,000 gallon capacity
tank is used for vehicle fuel. There is one unused 12,000 gallon storage tank. The status
of the underground fuel storage tanks is listed in Appendix E.
Airport Support Facilities
Airfield support activities at GCN include an Air Traffic Control Tower ( ATCT), Aircraft
Rescue and Firefighting ( ARFF), U. S. Forest Service, Airport Management and an Airport
Housing area.
Air Trajjk Control Tower ( ATCT). The ATCfwas constructed by the FAA in 1975. The
tower operates from 6: 00 am to 8: 00 pm in the summer and from 7: 00 am to 6: 00 pm
in the winter. There are presently eight ATCf controllers assigned to the facility. The
tower is equipped with Automatic Terminal Information Service ( ATIS) which provides
24 hour weather, altimeter and landing runway to pilots equipped with UHF radio
transmitters. There is also an automated surface observation station ( ASOS) located on
the airport. This unit automatically takes weather observations and reports them to
national weather service on a 24 hour basis.
Aircraft Rescue And Firefighting Facility. The Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Facility
( ARFF) is located north of the Terminal Building in a 2,100 square foot hangar
constructed in 1978.
The ARFF is certified to provide Index A or B firefighting capability, in accordance with
Federal Aviation Regulation ( FAR) Part 139. Compliance with Index A requires that
the airport be equipped with a minimum of one vehicle with a capacity of a combined
100 gallons of foam fire suppressant and at least 500 pounds of sodium based dry
chemical or halon 1211. Index B requires the same as above plus a vehicle carrying an
amount of water and commensurate quality of foam so that the total quality of water for
foam production carried by both vehicles is at least 1,500 gallons.
The ARFF is equipped with one Oshkosh firefighting vehicle containing 1,500 gallons
of water, foam suppressant material and 200 pounds of dry chemical. The airport's ten
maintenance personnel are all trained in ARFF procedures and requirements. The
airport also has a rapid intervention vehicle equipped with 50 gallons of foam and 500
- -- .'- _ r~ __ ~,' Lc_~~_. l __._~__- l ,-, d-~ __ d_,=~ ~~_- ~~ l..~~~ 4-~,_- 1- ~~~ 4-~~~~~.. 1 nnn ..~ 11 ........ ~ ....&
POUllU~ OJ. U1Y \,; 1l1;; 1lu\,; a1, allU a ;:) u U"''' U. l ~ ll. l'" ll5ll&.. l. U5 u Uv"" vv. u~. u. u. o ..., vvv ouuv. uo;, voL
water.
7
Snow Removal Equipment. On average, there are about 24 days annually when snow
accumulates on the runway/ taxiways, requiring removal. The airport maintains four
vehicles equipped with snowplows for snow removal purposes and two rotary
snowblowers.
U. S. Forest Services. The U. S. Forest Service leases a 3.8 acre parcel of land, located
approximately midfield, that is a facility for storing fire retardant materials ( slurry) for
aerial delivery.
Airport Management. The Airport Manager and Airport Maintenance Supervisor are
located in a modular building to the southeast of the terminal building. Airport
management maintains the airport with 12 permanent personnel, which includes ten
personnel assigned to maintenance, security and ARFF duties. The Coconino County
Sheriff's department provides after hours sUIveillance security to the airport. Two
airport buildings, one a 1,750 square foot maintenance building and one a 1,500 square
foot vehicle storage building, are located southeast of the terminal building.
Airport Housing. The State of Arizona has constructed several homes on the airport for
the airport employees due to a lack of housing facilities in Tusayan. The housing area,
with approximately 15 homes and trailers, is located southeast of the terminal building.
See recommendation entitled Airport Housing and Safety on P. 20 of the report.
Utilities. The airport is seIVed with propane gas, water, sewer, electricity and telephone.
Water for the airport is provided from two sources: a precipitation collection system and
transportation of water from offsite.
Water System. The heart of the water collection system on the airport is a collection
basin, which is located at the north end of the runway between the runway and taxiway.
Storm water runoff is collected in this basin as well as from the roof of the Terminal.
In normal years, the water collected by this system has met airport needs. However, at
times, water had to be trucked to the airport from the Grand Canyon National Park or
from the water supplies of Williams, Arizona.
The water system treats the water from the collection basin which is then used for
domestic use. When sufficient water is not available for treatment, potable water is
purchased and trucked in from the Williams area.
Domestic use water is distributed to the Terminal, FAA Tower, Employee Housing,
Equipment Buildings ( ARFF, vehicle storage and maintenance) and the FBO. Raw
water is stored in two tanks, a 379,701 gallon underground storage tank located north
of the Terminal and a 124,252 gallon above ground tank located east of the employee
housing area. Any expansion or development of additional facilities will require a study
of available water to support development.
8
A longstanding dispute over water rights was resolved in March of 1994 at a cost to the
Arizona Aviation Fund in the amount of $ 6.7 million. The resolution of this case should
solve the airports water problems for the foreseeable future, after modifications to the
storage and collection system are made.
Waste Water System. The waste water system, which was established as a septic tank
system, was modified in 1980 to a central collection and treatment system. Waste water
is collected in an eight inch Polyvinylchloride ( PVC) pipe and transported off the airport
to a waste water treatment facility owned and operated by the South Grand Canyon
Sanitary District. The airport pays a monthly fee for treatment and disposal of the
airport's waste water.
Electric, Gas And Telephone. Electricity is supplied to the airport by Arizona Public
Service. US West Telephone Company provides telephone service to the airport.
Propane Gas is used for heating purposes in some airport housing and is supplied by
truck to individual storage tanks. Heating in the remaining housing, terminal building,
ARFF station, offices, and maintenance buildings is electric.
DEMAND FORECAST
GCN is a very unique airport, probably one of the most unique in the country. This
uniqueness stems from several factors as follows:
Service Area
Unlike most airports which serve a local or regional population base, the GCN, because of
its unique location and foreign visitorship, has virtually a worldwide service area.
Origin- Destination Relationships
The passenger at GCN is also very unique. The key purpose of most passengers at an
airport is to obtain transportation to a distant destination with the aircraft being the primary
mode of transportation. At this airport, the purpose of many of the passengers is to use
GCN for sightseeing tours and the primary mode of transportation may have been
automobile or bus. Rail service is also included as an additional mode of transportation.
Type of Passenger
At most airports two passenger types are common: the business traveller and the pleasure
traveller. The business traveller normally constitutes about 50 percent of passengers at most
_ • _ .. · '..'!' C .. -~ L"-_ - ,.....~ 1'" , t_ 1.~_~ _ 4-_~,,-~~=,"~,,",,-#- .:,-, ", l",,~ ~"",...:..".......,,"",,,~,,, -~","",-"...~_""".~_ .. ~~~ ~~~ ~~~....~~ t"!:' Pt"'~ ~ T'. t:'!.,. OQ
aupUIL: S. ftL wc U"-'. l" l LllC LUUU~ L 1~ Lll~ J:' llllla. y J:' a. 3o::>"' U5"'. " yp'" uuu £"' p£"'''''' llW "" Y"'£ "" V
percent of the enplaned passengers. The business traveller represents less than two percent
of the enplaned passengers.
9
Airline Service
Most commercial service at an airport is scheduled passenger service. At GCN the majority
of the passenger service is unscheduled.
World Economy Influences
The factors that influence enplanement levels at Grand Canyon National Park are based on
the world economy. Many of the passengers are foreign and are attracted to the park based
upon marketing strategies and their country's economy as well as the value of the dollar.
some passengers, mostly U. S. citizens, arrive by automobile or similar conveyance. Their
travel is influenced by gasoline prices and/ or the availability of other competitive means of
travel ( bus, plane, railroad).
10
TABLE 1
GCN- Historlcal Airport Activity
YEAR OPERATIONS 1 ENPLANEMENTS BASED
AIRCRAFT
1979 89,786 176,000 13
1980 92,770 239,000 13
1981 108,859 230,000 13
1982 93,772 205,000 11
1983 90,305 199,000 11
1984 96,011 186,000 2 11
1985 88,688 69,000 2 9
1986 94,070 136,000 2 8
1987 120,180 424,960 3 8
1988 144,701 654,290 3 12
1989 151,975 705,660 3 15
1990 156,525 760,010 3 18
1991 160,891 871,677 3 21
1992 173,732 968,726 3 25
1993 187,444 1,063,431 3 25
Note: Off- airport helicopter operations included in total operations from May 1981 to present.
1 AIRPORT TOWER REcORDs.
3 GCN AIRPoRT RECORDS
11
FUTURE AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
The GCN Master Plan, prepared in January of 1991, identified $ 61 million in necessary
capital improvements ( L, B& I) to be developed in three discrete " stages" over a 20 year
period, commencing in FY90 and ending in the year 2010.
Stage I ( FY91- 95) contained 37 projects totaling $ 22.6 million. To date, 15 of the projects
totalling $ 3.6 million have been completed, mostly relating to the relocation of the heliport.
The single largest project included within the Stage I was $ 7.5 million for the construction
of a replacement Scheduled Airline Terminal, which was planned for construction in FY92.
This key project has been deferred indefinitely as a direct consequence of a major
commercial carrier ( America West) cancelling regularly scheduled air service to GCN. Most
of the infrastructure ( utility stub- outs) is in place in the event the terminal is placed back
in a future five- year CIP.
Three projects ( high intensity runway lights, removal of approach obstructions, and apron
and access road improvements) totalling $ 2.8 million are scheduled for completion in FY95.
Stage II and Stage III ( FY97- 99) projects totalling $ 11.9 million relate to the construction
of the parallel runway.
The following table illustrates the five year planned capital improvement program ( CIP) for
GCN approved in March of 1994 by the Transportation Board for GCN:
TABLE 2
GCN • Capital Improvement Program
Year Description Total
94- Surface Taxiway and Apron ( Pavement $ 3,650,000
95 Preservation); Fire Protection
95- Surface Taxiway and Apron ( Pavement $ 2,800,000
96 Preservation); Design Parallel Runway and Taxiway
96- Grade, Drain & Surface Parallel Runway, Taxiway $ 1,000,000
97 ( Phase I)
97- Grade, Drain & Surface Parallel Runway and $ 6,400,000
98 Taxiway ( Phase II)
98- Grade, Drain & Surface Parallel Runway and $ 5,500,000
99 Taxiway ( Phase III)
TOTAL $ 19,350,000
12
In summary, ADOT plans to expend $ 19.3 million on capital improvements through FY99,
mostly related to construction of the parallel runway. ( Note: The new terminal is not
included in the CIP.)
PRINCIPAL FINDING
After 27 years of " stewardship" by the ADOT Aeronautics Division and a capital investment
of $ 13.4 million, excluding infrastructure ( runway/ taxiways), GCN is, at the present time,
a marginal facility in nearly all respects. Interviews with tenants and tourists confrrm the
fact that the terminal is too small and overcrowded. Other interviews with FAA Air Traffic
Control staff validate ADOTs position that an additional parallel runway is needed
immediately as the growth in traffic has the existing runway and taxiways functioning at
capacity during peak periods. Most major equipment ( rolling stock) is rebuilt surplus
and/ or aged equipment.
The $ 19.3 million in capital improvements contemplated through FY99 will not begin to
bring GCN to an acceptable level standard to serve the international tourist clientele into
the next century. ( Note: This finding relates to the broad issue of whether the state has
succeeded as an airport operator and does not reflect on the current ADOT staff operating
the facility who are performing in a satisfactory fashion, considering the resources that have
been made available to them.)
POSSIBLE FUTURE OPTIONS
Option 1 • " Empower" GCN with the Appropriate Financial Manaa: ement Tools
Currently, " excess" revenues over expenditures at GCN are transferred into the Arizona
Aviation Fund. The Transportation Board establishes the policies and priorities for
distribution of these dollars to all airports in the state. GCN must, in a sense, " compete"
with all other airports within the state for its " share" of funding.
13
TABLE 3
GCN • Revenue and Expenditures by Fiscal Year
Estunated
Fiscal Transfers to
Year Revenues Expenditures AZ Aviation Fund
FY90 808,000 437,000 371,000
FY91 977,000 687,000 290,000
FY92 1,025,000 840,000 149,000
FY93 1,021,000 632,000 389,000
FY94* 1,095,000 635,000 460,000
""
14
Page 7- 8 of the Master Plan contained the following statement relative to enterprise funds:
It is recommended that the airport revenue and expenditures be accounted for under
an enterprise fund financial management system. This system would allow airport
management to more closely monitor revenue and expenses, obtain positive feedback
on management programs and the ability to respond quickly to adverse situations.
An enterprise fund also provides a more efficient system to track federal grants and
expenditures for capital improvement.
That recommendation is more valid today than when the plan was drafted. An enterprise
fund would allow GCN to be much more " entrepreneurial" in its approach to doing business.
Fund reserves could be created and earmarked for equipment replacement including rolling
stock. Reserve accounts could be established for the construction of buildings and other
necessary major capital expenditures. The various sources of revenue, including locally
generated funds could be " pledged" to secure revenue bond financing to assist in funding the
five and ten year CIP in a more expedient fashion.
Without such financial flexibility, it is difficult to predict with certainty, when the necessary
and long overdue capital improvements such as a replacement terminal will take place.
In summary, GCN needs to be " empowered" with the same financial tools and access to the
private sector capital markets that other publicly owned and operated airports possess, such
as the cities of Phoenix and Scottsdale. This is the only way that GCN will be able to
control its own destiny and fulfill its mission of becoming a '' world class" facility to serve its
unique role of gateway to one of the natural wonders of the world. A continuation of the
current approach to the development of this strategic state asset will result in a facility that
will further erode the image of the State of Arizona in terms of safety and convenience to
the international, national and regional tourist.
Option 2 - " Revisit" Privatization
Alternatively, if the necessary financial reforms are deemed to be not feasible, it may be
advisable to revisit the issue of privatization of GCN operations.
From 1985 through 1998, GCNwas managed and operated by Aveo Management Services
Corporation under a lease contract with the ADOT Aeronautics Division. Based upon
interviews with current GCN tenants and FAA tower personnel, it was clearly evident that
there was a noticeable and precipitous decline in services to the general public during the
period the private contract was in force. There appears to be a unanimous consensus on
the part of ADOT staff that participated in this three year experiment, that this effort was
a failure.
15
Indeed, according to Coffman Associates, the revenue received by the state during the
contract duration was only 20 percent of " typical" revenues when the facility was under the
direct control of ADOT. It should be pointed out, however, expenses to the state were
negligible, averaging 5 percent during the same contract period. Nevertheless, there were
clearly lessons learned from this experience.
There could potentially be several advantages to GCN from the contracting of airport
operations. Free access to capital markets is one particular advantage. A contractor could
enter into long term debt arrangements with private lenders for the purpose of financing
capital improvements. Moreover, a contractor could enter into joint ventures with current
GCN tenants. In point of fact, a current tenant has " offered" to participate in such an
agreement, however, there is no current " mechanism" in place statutorily that would
accommodate such a partnering approach.
Finally, assuming that the contractor has relevant experience in managing " like" facilities at
other locations, it would seem that the state could benefit from innovative management
methods and techniques and new technology that could be " transferred into" GCN
operations that would improve service to customers.
In summary, all of these conclusions are predicated on the assumption that ADOT now has
or could acquire basic competency in performance contracting methods and techniques
including the ability to monitor and encourage full performance from a private contractor.
Additionally, an existing deed covenant requires FAA approval to grant a private firm " the
exclusive right for the conduct of any aeronautical activity" at GCN. Because of this
reserved right, the FAA would have fmal say in this matter.
Option 3 - " Divest" Operations of GCN
Another alternative would be to completely divest operations at GCN. A business case
could be put forth that the State of Arizona lacks the capacity or the means to manage a
facility of the magnitude of GCN.
Additionally, in the purest sense, GCN represents an unfunded ( excluding entitlements)
federal mandate that the taxpayers of the state can ill afford. This is particularly true when
you consider the fact that the state receives minimal positive fiscal impact in the form of
excise taxes generated at the Grand Canyon Village ($ 1.3 million) as a contribution to
overall state revenues. Moreover, GCN staff estimates that 70% of all flights originate at
McCarran Airport in Las Vegas. From an aviation standpoint, Nevada is the Grand Canyon
State and benefits directly from capital expenditures paid for by citizens of Arizona.
16
Finally, when GCN was contemplated in the late 1950s and early 1960s, tourist traffic in and
around the Grand Canyon was not a problem. At that time, it made sense from a public
policy standpoint to encourage an aviation " gateway" to the Canyon. However, in the
inteIVening years, overflights in and around the Canyon have become a very heated issue
with very complex public policy overtones. It may no longer be a rational policy decision
to continue to invest scarce state resources in a facility that contributes to the alleged
degradation of the environment and has little positive impact on the state or local economy.
In summary, ADOT could " walk away" from the operations of GCN. A deed restriction
would revert the property to the federal government in the event the property would " cease
to be used for airport purposes for a period of six months" as determined by the FAA. This
would, of course, mitigate any future fiscal impacts on the Arizona Aviation Fund, with the
exception of entitlement grants, which would continue to flow to any subsequent operator
of GCN, assuming operations continued.
17
RECOMMENDATION
Appoint a Grand Canyon Airport Commission
To address the principal finding; that after 27 years of " stewardship" by the ADOT
Aeronautics Division and a capital investment of $ 13.4 million or more, excluding
infrastructure ( runway/ taxiways), the facilities at GCN, at the present time, are marginal in
nearly all respects. This finding does not reflect on the current ADOT staff operating the
facility who are performing in a satisfactory fashion, considering the resources that have
been made available to them. The state ( or a private contractor) needs either to ( 1) invest
in the asset in amounts much greater than the planned levels to serve the
international/ national tourist clientele into the next century or ( 2) divest itself from this
operation based on a '' business case" model that says the State of Arizona should not be in
the airport management business.
Furthermore, recent federal actions concerning " over flights" in the Grand Canyon National
Park beg the question; Is an airport located this close to the Grand Canyon an
environmentally appropriate venture?
Due to the ramifications of the above mentioned policy- management options, the Office for
Excellence in Government recommends that Governor Symington, through ADOT, appoint
a high level regional Commission for the purpose of reviewing the options discussed within
the body of this report and making a consensus written report to the Governor in a timely
fashion.
Membership on the Commission could be comprised of stakeholders that have an interest
in the future of GCN. Suggested appointees representing significant segments of the
communities within Northern Arizona could include, but are not limited to, the following:
Government: • US Department of the Interior/ Park Service ( Grand Canyon Park
Superintendent)
• Arizona Office of the Governor
• Arizona Department of Transportation
• Arizona Department of Commerce
• Arizona Office of Tourism
• Coconino County Board of Supervisors
• Cities of Flagstaff, Page and Williams
Non- Government: · The Grand Canyon Trust
• Chambers of Commerce & the Greater Flagstaff Economic
Development Council
• Grand Canyon Village/ Tusayan Business Community
Moreover, due to the importance of this issue, the OEG recommends that an executive
order be drafted promulgating the Commission. Staff support to the Commission would be
provided by OEG, as required.
18
II. GRAND CANYON AIRPORT OPERATIONS ISSUES
The team recommends that a formal, facilitated partnering session be conducted between
Aeronautics and ADOT management and Aeronautics line staff at the Airport. The session
should be held at the Airport, and should be directed toward formulating a plan, using Total
Quality Management Principles, which addresses the following issues:
STRUCTURE/ ALIGNMENT
• Develop expertise in contract negotiation and management at GCN
• Have only one shift supervisor, utilizing lead man concept on each shift
• Develop Airport Technicians as building maintenance/ equipment repair people who
have at least one of two other specialties: public safety/ security or EMT/ fire fighting
• Develop plan to address gap between GCN mission statement and current situation
LEADERSHIP/ MORALE
• Address policy and management style differences between the two airport technician
shifts
• Upgrade Airport Technician series positions to reflect responsibilities
PRODUCTMTY ENHANCEMENTS/ PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS
• Provide trailer- based bathroom facility for south ramp
• Provide strategically located portable toilets
• Partner with Office of Tourism, Dept. of Commerce, and Az. Highways Magazine
management to maximize PR and economic development potential of Airport
• Commence peer reviews, subordinate reviews of supervisors, and customer input as
part of EPAS process
EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
• Job description and advertising for Airport Technician positions needs to be changed
to reflect that 90% of job is building maintenance/ equipment repair - not fire fighting
and EMT
• Collect fuel flowage fee ( at approximately five cents per gallon)
• Determine feasibility of applying to FAA to enact a passenger facility charge ( at
approx. $ 3/ passenger)
• Re- design and build new terminal
• Facilitate building of new runway
• Pursue FAA approved radar and new tower
19
AIRPORT HOUSING AND SAFETY
An additional issue the OEG team wishes to highlight is that of employee housing.
Currently, ADOT employees are housed at the Airport facility itself. For years, this has
been a quality of life and a safety issue for both employees and management. This situation
will be exacerbated in the Summer of 1995 when the new heliport is expected to become
operational.
It should be noted that the housing situation is probably the most significant problem faced
by business and government entities in the Grand Canyon south rim area. Each employer
must subsidize housing to some degree in order to maintain even minimal staffing levels.
This is due primarily to the remote location and the lack of available private housing and
land.
To date, the most promising prospect for moving ADOT housing from the airport is with
the proposed Canyon Forest Village development. This housing and commercial area would
be located southeast of the airport along Highway 180. It would involve a land exchange
with the U. S. Forest Service. The exchange is currently in the first stages of the National
Environmental Protection Act ( NEPA) process.
It is recommended that ADOT support the development of alternate sites for employee
housing, negotiate adequate space at a new site for current and projected employee levels,
and move ADOT employees to the new location as soon as possible.
20
III. PHOENIX OPERATIONS ISSUES
The Team is also recommending that a formal, facilitated partnering session be held to
address the operations issues identified in the Phoenix headquarter operation of the division.
This partnering effort should devise a plan to address the following issues:
STRUCTURE/ ALIGNMENT
• Move aviation field representative position to Division Director's Office
• Restructure revenue collection process
LEADERSHIP/ MORALE
• Allow staff to use side stairwell
• Changemail distribution procedure to meet group needs
• Change phone system to meet group needs
• Ensure that administrative/ clerical support is equally available to all
• Improve travel procedures
• Develop a plan for building Division into a high performance TQ team
PRODUC~ ENHANCEMENTS~ ROCESSIMWROVEMENTS
• Log aircraft " N" numbers during 5010 ( or other) airport visits
• Establish a TQ Project Team work environment
• Commence peer reviews, subordinate reviews of supervisors, and customer input as
part of EPAS process
• Streamline aircraft registration process
• Streamline airport development process
• Improve coordination between state and federal aviation planning
• Discontinue low value- added advertising
EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
• Develop plan to enhance the level of partnering with the FAA
• Evaluate the effectiveness of the 5010 program and Pavement Management System
( PMS)
• Stimulate interaction between aeronautics and the other ADOT Divisions - to
develop partnerships in planning, pavement management, aircraft registration,
revenue collection, etc.
21
APPENDICES
Appendix A
GCN- Existing Airfield
I Facility 4 I Material I Width I Length I
Runway 03- 21 AC 150 ft. 9,000
ft.
Taxiway 03- 21 AC 75 ft. 9,000
ft.
Taxiway A AC 75 ft. 300 ft.
TaxiwayB AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
Taxiway C AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
Taxiway D AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
Taxiway E AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
Taxiway F AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
Taxiway G AC 75 ft. 400 ft.
4AILRUNWAYtI'AXIWAYPAVEMENTWILLSUPPORT88, OOOPOUNDSWL, IOS, OOOPOUNDSDWL, ANDl60, OOOPOUNDS
DTW. SV = AsPHALTIC CONCRETE, NA = NOT APPUCABLE
23
Appendix B
GCN- Navigational Aids
I NAVAID I
Enroute/ Frequency/ Approach Location
Description Tenninal Channel To Runway
Grand Both 113.1/ 78 03,21 0.16 nm
Canyon west of
VOR/ DME airport
U. s Terminal 108.9 03 Runway
03
Middle Terminal NA 03 0.5 nm
Marker South of
Runway
03
VASI Terminal NA 21 on
airport
NA = Not applicable
nm = Nautical miles
Rwy = Runway
24
Appendix C
GCN- Lighting and Marking
I I Runway 03 I Runway 21 I
Medium Intensity Rwy Lights ( MIRL) Yes Yes
Threshold Lighting Yes Yes
Runway End Identifier Lights ( REIL) No Yes
Approach Lighting - MALSR Yes No
Precision Instrument Marking Yes No
Non- Precision Instrument Marking No Yes
25
Appendix D
GCN- Apron And Tiedown Area
I Number of Aircraft Positions I
Apron Size Airline Commuter General
( s. y.) Aviation
General Aviation 14,600 NA 3 27
Air Carrier 30,000 2 12 40
South Apron 61,000 NA 0 60
TOTAL 95,600 2 15 127
Gen. Aviation = Single and twin engine aircraft, 12,500 lbs or less
Commuter = DeHavilland Dash 6
Airline = Boeing 737 or DeHavilland Dash 8
NA = Not Applicable
26
Appendix E
GCN- Fuel Storage Facilities
Tank Size ( gal) Installed Last Fuel Stored
Inspection
1 8,000 1967 1993 Auto Fuel
2 12,000 1967 1993 Jet A
3 12,000 1967 1993 Jet A
4 12,000 1967 1993 Jet A
6 6,000 1972 1993 100 LL
7 12,000 1972 Oosed None
8 12,000 1972 1993 100 LL
* The underground fuel is stored in an area that is within the Part 77 primary surface.
27
Appendix F
Glossary of Aviation Tenns
AIR CARRIER: An air carrier holding a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
issued by the Department of Transportation to conduct scheduled services over specified
routes and a limited amount of nonscheduled operations.
AIR TAXI: An air taxi operator which: ( 1) performs at least five round trips per week
between two or more points and publishes flight schedules which specify the times, days of
the week and places between which such flights are performed; or ( 2) transports mail by air
pursuant to a current contract with the U. S. Postal Service.
AIR TRAFFIC: Aircraft operating in the air or on airport surface, exclusive of loading
ramps and parking areas.
AIRPORT OPERATIONS: The number of arrivals and departures from the airport at
which the airport traffic control tower is located. There are two types of operations: local
and itinerant. ( Chapter II).
1. Local operations are performed by aircraft which:
( a) Operate in the local traffic pattern or within sight of the airport,
( b) Are known to be departing for, or arriving from flight in local practice
areas located within a 20- mile radius of the airport;
( c) Execute simulated instrument approaches or low passes at the airport.
2. Itinerant operation are all aircraft operations other than local operations.
AIRPORT TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER ( ATCT): A terminal facility which, through the
use of air/ ground communications, visual signaling, and other devices, provides ATCservices
to airborne aircraft operating in the vicinity of an airport and to aircraft operating on the
movement area. There are five types of ATCfs: radar, limited radar, nonradar, VFR, and
contracted towers.
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration.
GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS: Takeoffs and landings ofall civil aircraft, except
those classified as air carriers or air taxis. ( See also Airport Operations).
INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES ( IFR): Rules governing the procedures for conducting
instrument flight.
28
INSTRUMENT OPERATION: Arrivals or departures of an aircraft in accordance with an
IRF flight plan or special VFR procedures or an operation where IFR separation between
aircraft is provided by a terminal control facility. There are three kinds of instrument
operations:
1. Primary Instrument Operations: arrivals and departures at the primary airport which
is normally the airport at which the approach control facility is located.
2. Secondary Instrument Operations: arrivals and departures at all the secondary
airports combined.
3. Overflights: operations in which an aircraft transits the area without intent to land.
ITINERANT OPERATIONS: See Airport Operations.
LOCAL OPERATIONS: See Airport Operations.
NONRADAR ATCT: An airport traffic control tower providing approach control service
without the use of radar.
VFR TOWER: An airport traffic control tower providing takeoff and landing services
only.
VISUAL FLIGHT RULES ( VFR): Rules that govern the procedures for conducting flight
under visual conditions. The term ( VFR) is also used in the U. S. to indicate weather
conditions that are equal to or greater than minimum VFR requirements. In addition, it
is used by pilots and controllers to indicate type of flight plan.
29