FAA AC 150/5335-5: Reporting Airport Pavement Strength (PCR)

ACN-PCN is the older ICAO way to report pavement strength, an Aircraft Classification Number set against a Pavement Classification Number. AC 150/5335-5D replaced it with ACR-PCR and says the two have no mathematical correlation. It gives no method for finding a PCN. A PCR comes from the Using Aircraft method or a Technical Evaluation.

Every runway an airline plans a landing on has to answer one question before the performance numbers matter: will the pavement take this aircraft. The FAA answers it with a single circular. AC 150/5335-5D, dated 29 April 2022 and initiated by AAS-110, tells airports how to work out a Pavement Classification Rating and write it into the Airport Master Record. It replaced the 2014 edition, 5C, which used the PCN. It does not design or evaluate a pavement. It describes how to report the result.

What the circular is, and who it binds

Paragraph 1 says the circular gives guidance for reporting runway, taxiway and apron pavement strength in line with ICAO methods. Paragraph 3 sets its status. It does not constitute a regulation and is not legally binding in its own right. Conformity is voluntary, with two exceptions. Use is mandatory for projects funded under federal grant programmes including the Airport Improvement Program, through Grant Assurances 11 and 34. It is also mandatory for projects funded by the Passenger Facility Charge program, through PFC Assurance 9. A note adds that the circular is one, but not the only, acceptable means of meeting 14 CFR Part 139.

Paragraph 4 then splits by audience. The FAA recommends the ACR-PCR method for all paved runways, taxiways and aprons at all airports. It requires public use paved runways with air carrier service at Part 139 certificated airports to be assigned gross weight and PCR data by 28 November 2025, and cites 14 CFR 139.339 for it. Airports that have received AIP funds or been approved to collect PFC revenue are to update their Airport Master Record data on gross weight and PCR in step with their pavement management programme.

One point needs care. The text of 139.339 on eCFR, as of 20 October 2026, is the airport condition reporting section. It lists conditions to pass to air carriers, such as construction, surface irregularities and lighting faults, and does not mention PCR, pavement strength or gross weight. So the November 2025 date rests on what the circular states. The regulation itself, and any FAA certification guidance built on it, should be read directly for what an inspector will ask of a given airport.

From PCN to PCR, and the dates

The old system compared an Aircraft Classification Number with a Pavement Classification Number. The new one compares an Aircraft Classification Rating with a Pavement Classification Rating. Paragraph 1.2 says ICAO started a study group in 2009 and adopted ACR-PCR with Amendment 15 to Annex 14. The circular’s own list of principal changes names two. It updates the effective date paragraph and it incorporates the pavement strength reporting changes adopted in Amendment 15.

The ICAO side is dated in the Foreword of Annex 14, Volume I. Amendment 15 was adopted on 9 March 2020 and took effect on 20 July 2020. The table lists three applicability dates for the amendment as a whole, 5 November 2020, 3 November 2022 and 28 November 2024. It does not say which subject takes which date. The date for the reporting of pavement strength comes from EASA’s FAQ. It says ICAO set a four-year transition and that the method became applicable on 28 November 2024. The Annex 14 text read for this page no longer contains the terms ACN or PCN, and its section 2.6 describes ACR-PCR alone.

The FAA date falls a year after the ICAO one. The circular gives no reason for the gap. It sets the date and cites 139.339.

How the PCR is determined

Chapter 2 starts with the ACR. The aircraft manufacturer provides the official figure. It is two times the derived single wheel load, in hundreds of kilograms, at a standard tire pressure of 218 psi (1.5 MPa). It is calculated for four standard subgrade categories. Chapter 3 says the only mathematical model in the method is layered elastic analysis, that an ACR may be rounded to the nearest multiple of ten for reporting (paragraph 3.5.3.1), and that the FAA provides ICAO-ACR 1.3 and FAARFIELD 2.0, both public domain programs, to run it.

Paragraph 1.2.3 gives the rule that ties the two ratings together. A pavement with a given PCR can support an aircraft whose ACR is equal to or less than that PCR. Paragraph 4.1 adds that “unrestricted” does not mean “unlimited”. It means no weight restriction when the PCR is at least the ACR. It does not account for pavement life. The PCR should be re-evaluated if traffic changes significantly, which the circular describes as a new aircraft type or traffic above what the original analysis assumed.

The two methods differ in how much they need.

Using Aircraft (code U). Paragraph 4.3 takes the ACR of every aircraft currently permitted on the pavement and reports the largest as the PCR. It needs no detail on the structure. When the subgrade is unknown, category B is recommended. The circular warns that one rare, heavy aircraft can inflate the PCR and that a rational approach is needed, based on a design period minimum of 250 annual departures. It discourages the method on a long-term basis.

Technical Evaluation (code T). Paragraph 4.4 asks for the traffic mix and frequency, the thickness, material type and strength of each layer, and the elastic modulus of the subgrade. It says an evaluation may need a combination of on-site inspections, load-bearing tests and engineering judgment. The recommended procedure in paragraph 4.4.3 computes a cumulative damage factor for the forecast traffic and finds the critical aircraft and its maximum allowable gross weight. The ACR of that aircraft at that weight is a candidate PCR. Where the critical aircraft is not the one with the highest ACR in the mix, the steps repeat with the next aircraft and the PCR to report is the highest value found (step 13). The rating is valid for the usage period assumed. A new evaluation is needed after rehabilitation or when traffic changes from the initial forecast.

Paragraph 4.4.5 closes the point. The PCR should not be used for pavement design or as a substitute for evaluation. Paragraph 1.4 says the same of the whole system, which is a method airport operators can use to judge acceptable aircraft operations and nothing more.

The reporting code

Paragraph 4.5 sets a five-part code, ordered and separated by slashes. The numerical PCR is reported in whole numbers. Where strength varies along a pavement, the PCR for the weakest segment should normally be reported, though judgment may pick a more representative segment if the weakest one is not in the most used part of the runway.

The pavement type is R for rigid and F for flexible. For a composite pavement, the type should be the one that best reflects its structural behaviour, and the circular calls it good practice to add a note that the pavement is composite and what the wearing surface is. The subgrade category is A to D, with the elastic modulus values in the table above. The tire pressure code is W, X, Y or Z. The circular says rigid pavements can usually be rated W. It says well-placed asphalt of 4 to 5 inches (10.2 to 12.7 cm) can generally be rated X or W, while thinner pavement of poorer asphalt should not be rated above Y. The method code is T or U.

The circular’s example is 800/R/B/W/T. That reads as a PCR of 800 on a rigid pavement over a medium strength subgrade, with no tire pressure limit and a technical evaluation behind it. ICAO’s Annex 14 gives its own examples in the same format, PCR 760 / R / B / W / T and PCR 550 / F / A / Y / U.

Appendix D asks for the whole string. The Airport Master Record takes allowable gross weights for single, dual, dual tandem and multiple dual-tandem gear. Other gear types are reported with the PCR alone. Whatever the PCR, the circular treats these as the maximum allowable gross weights, in thousands of pounds. They are 120 for single wheel gear, 250 for dual, 550 for dual tandem and 1,220 for the multiple dual-tandem configurations. Appendix E lists weights for each PCR and subgrade category, and the circular says that when an aircraft’s ACR is known, the reported PCR is the better basis than those tables.

Overloads

Appendix C takes the ICAO simplified method for aircraft that exceed the PCR. Occasional traffic with an ACR not above 10 percent over the PCR should not adversely affect the pavement. A PCR of 600 can support limited traffic of aircraft with an ACR of 660. The annual number of overload movements should not exceed approximately 5 percent of total annual traffic, and the circular says there is no exact guidance on how to count that. Overloads should not normally be permitted on pavement that already shows structural distress, in thaw following frost penetration, or when water could weaken the pavement or its subgrade. When overloads run, the owner should regularly inspect the pavement condition and review the criteria. Excessive repetition can cut pavement life or bring forward a major rehabilitation.

How the EU and ICAO texts compare

The European framework is the reference for an EU aerodrome, and it lags the other two. Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 makes the aerodrome operator determine, document and maintain aerodrome data under ADR.OPS.A.005. AMC1 ADR.OPS.A.005(a) lists the strength of pavements among that data. The method itself appears in GM1 ADR.OPS.A.005, guidance written with “should”, and the March 2026 Easy Access Rules text still describes ACN-PCN. EASA’s FAQ says application of ACR-PCR in Member States has been deferred to a later date while the method is transposed into the EU framework. The FAQ page was last updated on 1 October 2024, so check the current EASA and national position before relying on it.

The FAA writes its circular to implement ICAO, so Annex 14 is the common source. In Annex 14, Volume I, section 2.6.2 says that the bearing strength of a pavement intended for aircraft of apron mass greater than 5,700 kg shall be made available using the ACR-PCR method, and lists the same five items. A “shall” in Annex 14 is a Standard. Section 2.6.3 says a reported PCR means an aircraft with an ACR equal to or below it may operate, subject to any tire pressure or mass limits. Its note allows different PCRs where strength varies significantly with the season. Section 2.6.8 covers aircraft of 5,700 kg or less, for which the pavement reports a maximum allowable mass and tire pressure. Section 2.6.7 is a Recommendation. It says criteria should be set to regulate use by an aircraft whose ACR is higher than the PCR, and points to Attachment A, section 19, for the simple overload method. The 10 percent figure sits there too.

The practical result is that an aerodrome’s published code depends on its State’s AIP and not on the FAA circular. The FAA circular matters to a European reader as a worked procedure, with the FAARFIELD route to a technical PCR, for a rating system that Annex 14 already prescribes. The EASA CS-ADR-DSN page and the ICAO Annex 14 page set out those frameworks for lighting and visual aids. For the code format and the older number, see the PCN glossary entry and the glossary entry on pavement strength .

Where a drone survey fits

A PCR is a statement about structure. Surface imagery measures a surface. The circular never mentions drones, imaging or the Pavement Condition Index, so nothing in it either approves or rules out a survey method.

What the circular does say points to a limited role. A technical evaluation needs layer thicknesses, layer moduli and the subgrade modulus. Those come from records, coring, ground-penetrating radar and deflection testing such as a falling weight deflectometer , not from a photograph. Paragraph 4.5.5 describes a Using Aircraft PCR as the highest ACR among aircraft currently using the facility “and not causing pavement distress”. Paragraph 4.4.2 notes that serviceability usually falls through roughness or localized distress such as rutting or cracking. Appendix C asks the owner to inspect the pavement condition regularly while overloads are allowed, and bars overloads on pavement showing structural distress. A record of surface distress, georeferenced and repeated over time, is evidence for those judgments. It is not the rating.

TarmacView’s pavement condition assessment rates surface distress to ASTM D5340 and gives a PCI for each sample unit. The service is in development and offered as early access. It does not compute a PCR, measure layer thickness or subgrade stiffness, or replace a technical evaluation. Where an airport keeps both, the distress record can sit beside the PCR in its pavement management system and show when the traffic behind a published rating needs a second look. The pavement strength post sets out the same boundary in more detail.