The problem comes from how computers and other microprocessors have recorded and computed dates for the past several decades. Nearly a third of the airports that responded to our questionnaire reported that they will not complete their preparations for the Year 2000 problem by FAA’s recommended date of June 30, 1999, and have no contingency plans in place. However, a substantial number of the airports (about a third of the large airports, about a quarter of the medium-sized airports, and half of the small airports) reported they had no contingency plans, did not know of such plans for any of their core functions, or did not respond. 3). 4). 5). 6). However, manual procedures could seriously reduce an airport’s efficiency, thus causing delays that could ripple through the NAS. First, contractors with appropriate expertise can provide the trained personnel that an airport might lack and might be able to repair equipment faster than that airport’s staff. Officials at large airports, in particular, acknowledged the importance of contractors. Aviation Industry Associations Have Been Assisting Airports’ Year 2000 Efforts

Aviation industry associations have been working to help ensure airports will be prepared to operate through and beyond the year 2000. FAA Is Helping Airports Prepare for the Year 2000

To maintain the continued operation of the NAS, several offices within FAA are collaborating to help ensure airports are adequately prepared for the year 2000. The Year 2000 program office intends to plan for any disruptions that could occur if the nation’s airports are not prepared for potential delays caused by Year 2000-related equipment malfunctions. The Associate Administrator for Airports has also set criteria for verifying the Year 2000 readiness of airports’ equipment that is used to meet FAA’s safety and security requirements and has established a national team to monitor the airports’ progress in preparing this equipment for the date change. FAA has also formed an Aviation Industry Year 2000 Steering Committee to (1) serve as the focal point to promote the exchange of information on the status of Year 2000 preparations with industry representatives and (2) identify and facilitate the effective resolution of Year 2000 issues that could affect the safety, the security, and the efficiency of the NAS. Conclusions

Because the problems confronting airports as they prepare for the year 2000 are complex and airports’ preparations are still in process, it is not clear at this time (1) which airports could suffer equipment malfunctions on and after January 1, 2000, and (2) whether any malfunctions could decrease airports’ efficiency or create escalating delays throughout the NAS. But some airports have reported that they are using an ad hoc approach to prepare their equipment for the year 2000, and some have reported that they will not complete their Year 2000 preparations by FAA’s recommended date of June 30, 1999, and that they currently lack contingency plans. Because of the interdependence among airline flights and airport facilities, decreased efficiency and delays at one airport could cause delays at other airports and eventually impede the flow of air traffic throughout the nation, especially if those delays occur at airports that serve as hubs.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the status of airports' efforts to prepare for the year 2000, focusing on: (1) the status of airports' efforts to help ensure that their computers and electronic equipment will function properly on and after January 1, 2000; (2) how the safety, the security, and the efficiency of the National Airspace System will be affected if airports' year 2000 preparations are not completed in time; and (3) the factors that will affect the progress of airports' preparations for the year 2000.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the nation's airports have been making progress in preparing for the year 2000; (2) however, there is substantial variation in the progress they have achieved and the approaches they have been taking; (3) among the airports responding to GAO's survey, about one-third reported that they would meet the June 30, 1999 date the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommended to complete preparations for addressing the year 2000 date change; another one-third did not report that they would meet this date but had begun contingency planning to help ensure continued operations if equipment malfunctions; and a final one-third did not meet either of these criteria; (4) the final third are mostly small airports, but they include 9 of the nation's 50 largest airports; (5) officials at airports and FAA agreed that adequate safeguards are in place to ensure the safety and the security of the National Airspace System before and after the year 2000 date change; (6) however, airports that do not meet FAA's June 1999 recommended preparation date are at increased risk of experiencing some equipment malfunctions; (7) if manual procedures must be substituted for operations normally controlled by automated equipment, an airport's efficiency--its ability to handle its normal number of scheduled flights per day--would decrease and thus cause flight delays; (8) because of the interdependence among airline flights and airport facilities, delays at one airport could cause delays at other airports and eventually affect the efficiency of the National Airspace System; (9) the severity of these delays would depend to a large extent on the size of the airports and which equipment malfunctions; (10) FAA, airport, and other aviation industry officials cited several factors that have affected the timeliness of year 2000 preparations, including an airport's use of contractors, the assistance provided by aviation industry associations, and the activities undertaken by Congress and by FAA; (11) contractors have helped some airports prepare for the year 2000 by providing them with the trained personnel they lack; and (12) aviation industry associations have helped increase airports' awareness of the implications of the year 2000 through discussions at seminars and workshops and by identifying airport equipment that might be vulnerable to problems caused by the date change.