Jane Garvey

The airline industry is booming, but there is always a problem facing the head of the Federal Aviation Administration, whether it’s trying to prevent airline disasters or getting more of the flying public home on time.

For FAA Administrator Jane F. Garvey, work has ranged from explaining to Congress why air-traffic control contributes to travel delays to a 10-hour Y2K flight over the United States to assure travelers that the new millennium would arrive without planes dropping from the skies.

Garvey became the 14th FAA administrator in August 1997, taking over a 49,000-employee agency that tends to be about as popular with the public as baseball umpires, tax collectors and root canals. Today, the majority of complaints center on flight delays, which rose 16% last year, with the trend expected to continue for the foreseeable future. There’s even a top-10 list of most-delayed flights that has gained media attention. Last year, the dubious honor of No. 1 went to a US Airways jet that logged 160 hours of delays on its Washington, D.C.-to-Atlanta junket. That’s the equivalent of sitting on a runway or waiting in a stack above an airport for nearly one week.

Garvey, the daughter of a U.S. Air Force colonel, was born in Brooklyn but spent much of her youth in western Massachusetts in the area around Amherst College. She earned degrees from Mt. Saint Mary College and Mt. Holyoke College. Her husband, Robert, serves as sheriff of Hampshire County, Mass.

The FAA chief first got involved in transportation issues when she opposed a bypass road that she said would have eliminated landmarks “that make rural Massachusetts so neat.” By 1983, she was working for then-Gov. Michael S. Dukakis at the state’s public-works department, where she became commissioner in 1988. She moved on to direct Boston’s Logan International Airport in 1991. Garvey went to Washington to serve as acting administrator of the Federal Highway Administration during President Bill Clinton’s first term.

The Garveys have a 26-year-old daughter, Kelly, who teaches Spanish to special-needs children in Boston, and a son, Matthew, 25, whom Garvey says has the ideal job: working for the Boston Red Sox. Garvey insists that this is the year the Red Sox will win the World Series (Boston last won in 1918), a die-hard optimism that gives you an idea of why she is so capable of defending the FAA to detractors. Recently, she talked by telephone about how a shortage of new and modernized airports has contributed to air-travel delays.

*

Question: We hear a lot about delays for air travelers, technological fixes to alleviate some of their waits and routing commercial airliners through currently restricted military airspace. But there is little talk about an airport shortage. The Airports Council International, for example, said the U.S. will need 10 new airports the size of Dallas-Fort Worth to keep up with increasing traffic.

Answer: If you look at the numbers and areas, both on the air side and the ground side, you really see a system that is under enormous strain. . . . [But] I wouldn’t say it’s broken. [Given] the growth and demand we’re seeing in aviation, it’s not enough just to think of the air side, it’s not enough just to think of the technology, although that’s critical and important. We have often said that if you modernize the air-traffic control system, and you increase the capacity on the air side but do nothing on the ground side, you’re not going to be able to get people to the airports, you’re not going to have the gates and the ability to handle . . . increased capacity. The last large airport built was Denver’s [approved by voters in 1989 but not opened until February 1995], and if you ask people who were involved in that process, they would tell you how very difficult it was to see it from start to finish. So . . . there are not many places running to embrace a new airport.

Q: The Airports Council International, which regulates the world’s airports, also says that there needs to be more national coordination. To quote the group: “The Federal Aviation Administration should not take legal responsibility, but it could do a better job coordinating and looking at national needs.” Does that mean the FAA can do a better job locally of talking about how important either a new airport or expanding an existing one would be to the regional development of airspace?

A: I think we need to be much more proactive than we’ve been in the past. When I look at places and see some successes, I think it’s [because] both federal and local authorities [are] very much in sync and delivering the same kind of message. . . . The great challenge is that there’s really a responsibility for both. People often think, for example, that [the FAA] initiates runway projects. That’s not the case. . . . That’s got to be a local decision. But I think [the FAA] can play a very, very active role in working with local communities and working with aviation leaders in an area to ask, is the runway the right answer?

Q: Governments from San Diego to Los Angeles were hoping that voters would approve a new airport at the former Marine air base at El Toro in Orange County to relieve pressure on them to expand their airports. For example, San Diego believed that an airport at El Toro would mitigate the need to expand its Lindbergh airfield. LAX expansion opponents were looking for leverage to argue against expansion. But voters made it extremely difficult to open an airport at El Toro. Is this kind of situation fairly common?

A: It is not unusual. In varying ways, we’re seeing that in other places, and we’re seeing more litigation. Just look at Boston: There’s been a court injunction against building a runway [at Logan International] for 25 years. If airport officials decide they want to build a runway, which is what they really want to do, they’re going to have to go back to the court. That’s not how to deal with public policy, but that’s been the reality of some aviation issues.

Q: We have large airports that could sustain significantly higher capacity if they had fewer commuter operations. Both LAX and John Wayne in Orange County are examples. Some L.A. officials want to shift some of the two airports’ commuter traffic to Ontario, Burbank and Palmdale. Does that sound like a reasonable course?

A: That theory of specialized airports is something we are seeing and hearing more of. . . . For example, if you look at Louisville, that has become a cargo center. If you look at Dallas-Fort Worth, that’s a base for Southwest [and] low-fare airlines. We are seeing more [local officials] asking, “What if we create specialized airports, does that help us with this whole issue of noise? Does that help us [deal] with expansion in a way that’s sensible?” [A specialized airport] is an idea that people really didn’t talk about 10 years ago, or 15 years ago, and probably not even five years ago.

Q: Besides commuter operations, officials are talking about shifting some cargo flights to smaller outlying airports. Is that realistic? Are other jurisdictions trying that?

A: Yeah. Louisville again is just a great example . . . but nothing is ever easy in this arena. I mean, there are a number of passenger airliners that carry cargo, as well. So, it becomes a question of whether there is enough cargo traffic to generate separate [treatment]. [The FAA] has to look at that, and airlines have to look at that as well, but with the increase that we’re seeing in cargo shipments, that may make great sense.

Q: Passenger traffic at LAX is currently 65 million trips a year. It’s estimated that it will rise to 98 million by 2015. Is it realistic to assume that LAX will not grow?

A: I hope it can grow, but in a way that is sensible and in a way that strikes some balance. I think it is unrealistic, and would be counterproductive, for any place in the country not to think about modernizing its airport or bringing it up to a level where it can handle an increase in demand and growth. But having said that, [modernization] has to be done in a way that is sensitive to neighborhoods and to community issues. The great challenge is finding that right balance. . . . The federal government must provide and should provide some leadership and should be an active participant in the discussions, and I do believe we can do a better job at that. But . . . the role of local leadership to try to fashion some compromises cannot be overstated.

Q: Are the airline industry and the FAA moving fast enough to develop quieter jets?

A: There’s a lot of pressure not only internationally but [domestically] to come up with quieter engines. We’re seeing the manufacturers doing a lot. . . . [But] most people would probably say they’d like to see us go faster. The quieter Stage 3 [jet], though, is a good success story. We set a deadline, industry met it and, in fact, industry beat it in most cases. That’s indicative that [industry] is taking it seriously. . . . When I look at the history of Stage 3, however, I wonder if we raised expectations too much. Sometimes, people believe that if you move to Stage 3, there should be absolutely no noise, but, of course, we know that while [Stage 3 jets] are considerably less noisy with increased traffic, there is still noise [and that] makes the challenge to get to Stage 4 that much greater.

Q: There are plans to create a staging area for LAX passengers at Van Nuys Airport, who would be moved by some means to LAX, which would alleviate a lot of the parking congestion at LAX. What do you think of this idea?

A: The idea of a bus [and] remote parking is very, very creative and . . . the right way to go. The challenge is going to be whether you can create a terminal where people can check bags at the outskirts, then get on . . . a bus and go directly to their [air] terminal. If you can do that and create remote ticketing and baggage check-in, I think you really do deal with some of these [congestion] issues.

Q: How did you become the FAA’s administrator?

A: The biggest quantum leap for me was going from teaching at Mt. Holyoke to associate commissioner, in ‘83, for the state public-works department, which is quintessentially a male agency. When I came to Washington in 1993, I was the deputy in the Federal Highway Administration. Rodney Slater was the administrator. When he went upstairs to become [transportation] secretary, I thought he was going to ask me to stay on as highway administrator, but he decided that the FAA is where I should be.

Q: The FAA is a male-dominated department, too, isn’t it?

A: Yeah, it is.

Q: What’s that been like for you?

A: Oh, it’s been fascinating! You know, there’s something wonderful when you have a position of power. Issues of gender become less important, and the position sort of takes precedent, but there are subtle distinctions. . . . Humor gets you through a lot. So I try to keep it in perspective. *