Link JB etc
The decision to withdraw (or add) any airfield facility is not taken lightly, only after careful discussion and hazard analysis involving Operations and ATC. In the case of RET 'JB' the LVP scenario was considered, and, as someone else has pointed out, no one could recall when 05L (or 06L) was last used in LVP. The negligible surface wind usually experienced in LVP means that the runway direction can be chosen, and invariably this is 23. Even when 05 is used, JB can be problematic because it delivers arriving aircraft straight into the taxiway bottleneck at the end of Pier A. This can create conflicts and require co-ordnation between Air and Ground controllers, often with next to no notice. So JB is not the capacity panacea in LVP or normal Ops, it is better for aircraft to vacate further east, allowing more routing and sequencing options in the T3 area - an area which is set to gain more stands. It is for these reasons that JB has been deleted from the Airfield Masterplan.
All-day operations on 05R-23L, and the upgrade of 05R to CAT III are development objectives in the Masterplan with no fixed time-scale. Such developments, whilst operationally attractive, have to be financially justified. The business case for both makes more sense as traffic grows. Hopefully it will soon.