Table of Contents
From The President
From The CEO
GREETINGS
Let me welcome all of you to Las Vegas. We are all a little older and may be a little grayer but we’re still employed and getting stronger in our dealings with the FAA. Rumors are still flying and I hope this National meeting will squash most of the untrue rumors and identify the rumors that are based in fact. Once a year we meet to compare our accomplishments and to plan for next years goals. This is your opportunity to socialize with your fellow members in NAATS and reflect on the past, but it is also your opportunity to look towards the future. NAATS has come a long way and has a long way to go. We are beginning negotiations of a new Labor Management Agreement to take us into the new century. We have established relationships with other Unions in the FAA to insure the exchange of information. We have testified to Congress on various issues facing Flight Service and we have established committees at all levels of the FAA to represent and protect the rights of our membership.We do not stop here. We proceed to higher goals, we must establish a road map of where we want to be in the years ahead. Your help is needed in establishing those future goals. We all are an important part of this organization and we must work together not only in establishing goals for NAATS, but in achieving those goals. We cannot be content to review our successes to date but must be prepared to go forward in achieving more successes in the future. I am confident as a team all of us in NAATS shall be successful in reaching new heights in our dealings with the FAA.
Good work and I know the same diligence and dedication of the past shall be applied in the future.
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS — After smoothing over some rough spots regarding previous Agency commitments, we’re still scheduled to begin the week of November 13. You should be aware that the FAA team seems determined to make this a traditional, confrontational, power-based negotiation. We anticipate a long, protracted fight with them to secure a fair contract for our membership. In our favor is that fact that the NAATS team is well trained, disciplined and highly motivated for this task.
ARCHITECTURE WORK GROUP — Seems that the FAA is determined to formulate a plan for part-timing and/or closing AFSS’s whether we participate or not. We’re working with the appropriate congressional representatives and their staffs in opposition to this effort. Please review the special NAATS NEWS October edition for more information. The important thing to remember is that we have not agreed to any proposal to develop an Air Traffic policy on part-timing or closing AFSS’s.
ALTERNATIVE WORK SCHEDULES (AWS) — This issue continues to generate many questions and misunderstandings from the field. Please read Mike Doring’s article in this publication for our latest guidance.
MID-TERM BARGAINING — Listed below are some of the matters we’re currently negotiating with the FAA. Some of these may be combined with the contract negotiations in November.
Goal Sharing,
Extended Temporary Duty Program,
CBI Equipment Replacement,
Radiation Safety Program,
ASOS/ATIS Link,
Headset Replacement,
ATS PRIBS 5, 12, 19, 23, 25,
Travel Reform Recommendations 001, 003, 005, 006, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 301, 302, 303,
ATCSCC Personnel,
Operational Medical Surveillance Program,
DF,
Initial Qualification Training Proposal,
Aircraft Type Identifiers conforming w/ICAO Standards,
Equipment qualifiers for heavy and TCAS equipped aircraft.
We need your input. Please provide any comments or suggestions on these or any other matters to your regional representatives.
Congressional Update: FY 1998 DOT/FAA Spending Bill: The Good, The Bad And The Ugly
Following, then, is a brief discussion of some of the highlights — and low lights — the bill contains.
THE GOOD
On the up-side, Congress continued to fund the OASIS program, although not at the level requested by the Administration earlier in the year. The conference agreement includes $3.9 million for OASIS in FY 1998. This amount is $1 million less than that requested by the Administration and agreed to by the Senate.
Despite the $1 million reduction from the budget request, NAATS should consider this funding level a victory. Several million dollars in previously-appropriated funds remain unexpended for OASIS, making it difficult for the agency and for NAATS to justify higher funding levels.
Additionally, OASIS funding compares very favor-ably with several other programs, including a planned $7.15 million procurement for new AWOS units and a $2 million tower automation item — both of which were totally eliminated, as were numerous other programs.
Finally, NAATS fared better in this bill than did either NATCA or PASS. NATCA sought drastically reduced funding for the STARS program plus additional funding for its pay plan. In the end, STARS received more funding than was proposed by the House and the bill did not include any dollars for NATCA’s new pay plan. In turn, PASS sought a reduction of $3.659 million in the agency’s contract maintenance program, but this money was fully restored. On the whole, then, NAATS and its major program came out much better than we expected at several points during this process.
THE BAD
Nevertheless, the $1 million reduction for OASIS came after we worked harder on OASIS this year than any other year in my memory. For example, we worked closely with Washington representatives for the Harris Corporation — the OASIS contractor — to ensure they also requested the full $4.9 million amount from their contacts in Congress. We also asked the FS Controllers at Leesburg, which is in the district of House subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf — to contact him in support of the additional funding. The Leesburg workers rose to the occasion, making numerous calls to Rep. Wolf’s office. A special thanks to Ron Maisel and Kurt Comisky for their able assistance with these two projects. Together, these actions probably helped retain the $3.9 million against an additional reduction — Irv and I will know more after post-mortem work with Hill staff.
THE UGLY
As you may know, DOT funding for the first few days of October was provided under yet another Continuing Resolution (CR) because of numerous delays in agreeing to the appropriations bill’s other provisions. When the President signs the bill, the CR will be nullified as it applies to DOT. There were several reasons for the (unrelated to NAATS) delays, which include sharply reduced budget allocation numbers in the Senate, Rep. Wolf’s strong opposition to the Senate subcommittee Chairman Richard Shelby’s (R-AL) attempt to "corner the market" on bus money for his state and a major dispute on a provision allowing increased use of Dallas’ Love Field. At one point last week, Rep. Wolf even complained to Speaker Gingrich, in writing, that negotiations were at an impasse. Eventually, how-ever, both sides were able to reach a compromise and pass the bill.
As always, please feel free to contact Irv or me with any questions or comments.
LABOR RELATIONS by Mike Doring
Lately my weeks have been taken up by questions on the negotiations of watch schedules at facilities. NAATS has on other occasions put out information guidance to FacReps on watch schedule negotiations. Nothing has changed.
The FAA is not doing away with AWS. The Alternate Work Schedules are covered by Article 30 of the Labor Management Agreement. NAATS can negotiate any AWS allowed by the FAA, and that covers all options in the law. Four day work weeks, 10 hour days, nine hour days etc.
Air Traffic has stated they do not intend to eliminate AWS, they just wish to control exorbitant costs through out Air Traffic. So the bottom line is AWS is still available to NAATS., but you must negotiate your schedules.
Now what happens when your facility is short people? You must get creative in your negotiations if you want to keep AWS. Options available to NAATS when we had plenty of people may not be realistic with less people. Look at Article 30. AWS is allowed unless there is negative impact on watch cover-age or overtime. Negative impact does not mean cost neutral. as some facilities maintain. Watch coverage is the control-ling factor.
Negotiations should not be confusing. If, at the local level agreement cannot be reached, the local FacRep should elevate the negotiations to the Regional Director level. The regional Director shall negotiate for the facility . Remember negotiate means bargain, not always getting exactly what everyone wants. If, agreement cannot be reached at the Regional level impasse is declared and the negotiations are for-warded to the national level. That has yet to happen because of the efforts of our local reps and regional Directors in doing their job.
Don’t look upon AWS as gone, it is not. Creative negotiating and cooperation with facility management will probably solve most problems. If not the negotiated Agreement supplies the answer. NAATS must work together to accomplish our goals and all representatives should be knowledgeable of the process used to attain those goals.
As always it is better to call your Regional Director or the National Office if you have questions before you proceed to negotiate.
If you or anyone in your facility is facing mandatory retirement under Public Law 92-297, Please contact John Dibble, Denver AFSS, (303) 799-7034 or via the internet [email protected].
One of our controllers is facing mandatory retirement next year with being eligible for retirement benefits. "Proper channels" are saying there’s nothing we can do, it’s the law! I am trying to find out how widespread a problem it is and what possible solutions we can come up with. John Dibble
AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
By Andrea Chay, NAATS REP.
ATPAC 89 convened at 9 AM, Monday, Oct. 6, 1997 in the MacCracken Room at FAA Headquarters. We received several briefings this meeting due to requests from AOCs generated at the Portland meeting in July. A few more headquarters changes: Tom Litner will be replacing Tony Ferrante, ATO-120. Tony will become Manager, AAT-200, Investigations Division. Chuck Reavis, former ATO-100 acting is now in charge of the International Division, AAT-30. Benny (Lee) McGlammery will be coming in as acting ATO-100 until the selection of another is confirmed, then he will go back to Southern Region. John Walker, former Eastern region head is now ATA-1, Program Director for Airspace Management. He visited and briefed us on a few possible changes. He stressed the present use of the Nation’s airspace will not sustain what air commerce demands within the next 5-6 years. Changing technology will initiate many changes, he used the example that Microsoft’s Bill Gates plans to put up 300 satellites by the year 2000. An example of change in the use of airspace is RVSM, reduced vertical separation minimums. This is being done with the North Atlantic Tracks, etc. FMS and other technologies are quickly making current standards obsolete. John also mentioned that operations will drive the airspace needs, do we need 20 centers, or even 10? One idea is for 4 high altitude centers and 6-10 low altitude centers. (This is all conjecture, but the ideas are being taking seriously.)
Free flight, if successful, will dramatically change needs regarding staffing and facilities. Regarding Flight Service, there is some thought of giving us our own Division instead of us being lumped in with terminal and enroute. We would have a division manager who would equal voice in decisions as the terminal and enroute managers now have. This would be a good thing, as previously we have always been at the bottom of the priority list. Also in this division would be contracts; i.e. our FSS trained division manager would be in charge of letting the contracts for weather services, low activity towers, etc. It does not appear to mean that FSS would be up for contracting out as some folks fear, we instead would be in control of the contracts. I spoke at length with Jim Parris, a NAATS person who is working a detail in ATO-120, and he explained to me why NAATS, and we should support this. We need to encourage Jeff Griffith, ATO-1 to continue to pursue this idea of his, and to select a FSS person for this new position ( to be called ATO-300).
One very good thing to come out of this ATPAC resulted from my AOC on the status of the DF system. Apparently when it was decided the VDF system was dead, and that the 5530’s (strobe type DF’s) were no longer maintenance supportable, that Airway Facilities thought all DF’s were to be decommissioned. A new alert bulletin signed by Ron Morgan, Monte Belger, and Stanley Rivers,AAF-1, clarifies the original intent. The 5530’s will be put on a prioritized decommissioning schedule (another way to say when they break?). They will use previously decommissioned 5530’s as spare parts. The 9964’s will be maintained, and possibly relocated when the 5530’s are pulled out. These 9964’s should only be relocated from places where radar coverage is systems currently in use are ASR-WSP, 2 types of LLWAS, and TDWR. We asked for this briefing due to concerns about the reliability and proper usage of TDWR vs. LLWAS. WARP is now in the CWSUs at the centers replacing the MWP. There is one more new product called ITWS, integrated terminal weather system. There are presently 3 test facilities which have the system, one of which is at DFW. It has even greater capabilities for severe weather detection. While I was in Dallas for the NBAA convention at the end of September, I visited FTW AFSS where they have a drop on the ITWS at DFW tracon. One really nice feature of ITWS is the capability to provide two minute microburst prediction. Every TDWR will eventually have an ITWS system. So, I spoke up and requested (pleaded) that each associated AFSS get a drop on the ITWS once installed at the major terminals in their areas. One of the FTW EFAS specialists told me how valuable having access to the ITWS is in providing service, so I couldn’t pass up the chance to try to get us some more equipment. (Can’t hurt to ask!!) Donna Drake, the person in charge of the project, said the request has already been made, it will all depends on funding (what doesn’t?). I’ll keep you posted. Also, it is possible at a later date to datalink ITWS to the cockpit.
Another briefing we received concerned the standardization of flight plans to some common ICAO standard. Brian Throop, ATO-110 briefed us on some of the proposed changes. Basic changes will include 12 ICAO compliant messages rather than just the 3 we now have. Effective Nov. 6, 1997, the aircraft type identifiers will be standardized. From what I hear, this is minimal impact for us, military designators will return to civilian designators. In Phase 1, flight plans to Canada and Mexico will change to ICAO format. The approximate dates are for initial testing mid 1998 and national deployment in 1999. Phase 2-all domes-tic flight plans will be ICAO format. I asked if center boundaries would have to be named with crossing times like the FIR boundaries now. I was assured that the Host to Host transfers would continue automatically, as they are now. Phase 2 would start as soon as 2000 assuming all goes smoothly. Phase 3 which includes auto-hand-offs between countries, 4D routes and replacing the Host totally is scheduled for sometime after 2003. Jim Parris, NAATS, will be watching this process closely for us. Changes to our job are inevitable, we must be sure to manage the change, rather than just letting it be done unto us.
Other briefings and items we covered included the 250 KT test at IAH, ILS-PRM approaches, converging approaches to intersecting runways, runway incursions, digital ATIS, and wake vortex research, plus LAHSO, parachute jumping in high density airspace, and visual approaches. For you computer savvy types, ATPAC now has a home page on the internet. The address is: http// www.faa.gov/ats/ops/atpac.htm and there are lots of interesting things on the ATO home page. Check it out! Every time I attend these ATPAC meetings, I learn more, meet new people, and thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to represent you at this prestigious gathering of aviation professionals. Let’s stay in touch!!
[email protected] (409) 523-1642 CXO (409) 523-1643 fax
Mission Needs Statement (MNS) 320 Voice Switching for Automated Flight Service Stations
by Terry Lankford NAATS ARS Liaison
MNS-320 is a requirement to replace the aging, analogue ICSS equipment with new digital voice switching technology. The Air Traffic Requirements Service (ARS) organizations supports this proposal and has requested Union participation in the program.
ARS has receive Joint Resource Counsel (JRC) approval of the MNS-320. The project is now in the Investment Analysis phase. At this point in time 61 units are proposed. However, in light of current events and the capabilities of the proposed equipment, fewer units are not out of the realm of possibility.
The voice switch will have the following capabilities:
1. Equipment has scaleable architecture that facilitates realignment. 2. Equipment has operational capability to consolidate and/or realign facilities. 3. Equipment supports OASIS. 4. Scheduled to be field between FY00 and FY02.
After approval of the next JRC, the program will go into the Solution Implementation phase. Money for this project has been budgeted for FY00. This date may be significant in light of recent FAA/NAATS architecture discussions.
Back to Table of Contents
by OSH Rep Suzanne M. Pellosmaa
Sorry folks for no article for last month, but time slips away and with numerous issues to address it has been quite hectic here. I will try to give you a quick update on some current happenings but I’m sure that we did address most of these topics/issues at the NAATS convention held last month.
First item I would like to mention is the status of the FAA OSHECOM. My co-partner in crime, Donald Oliveira, NATCA OSH Rep, is on a committee that is suppose to be checking on the status of regional and field OSHECOM committees, and word from him is that the FAA’s establishment date of Dec 1997 is very unrealistic at this time. Currently, there are even a few regions where air traffic does not want to participate in facility safety and health.
Recently, I received some information reference to a possible solution to our current HVAC problems, or this could at least give us fresher and cleaner air in our flight service stations. It is a new filterization system called the Ultra Germicidal Air Probe Sanitizer and a few basic facts about the system includes:
*cleans the air
*no chemical uses
*24 hour protection-365 days a year
*kills the viruses and germs
*installed out of sight
How does the system work you ask? The system is installed inside the air handler or duct work so the evaporator coil surface is being constantly illuminated, thus all of the micro-organisms are killed and new growth is prevented from starting. Each time the indoor air is refreshed through the air handling system, 70-85% of the organisms are destroyed by the UV-C light and ionization as the air passes by the installed unit. The systems are completely safe and effective. The Ultra Germicidal Air Probe Sanitizer is UL approved, recognized by the EPA, and classified as non-ozone generating. A letter from a medical center located in the New England area states, "Over a period of years, our employees in the medical records dept. had experienced severe respiratory problems. Upon examination, our engineering department had attributed poor air quality to be the leading cause. Since the installation of your probe unit, we have seen a dramatic improvement in employee productivity in the medical record dept."
Otherwise I was invited for one day to attend the Eastern Region Safety Seminar held in the baltimore inner harbor area, this past August. It was very interesting because a few of the air traffic hub managers were there and a main concern of theirs was "who is responsible for the safety and health of a facility?" Bill O’Melia, Safety Manager of the EA, could not give a definite answer but his reply was that if Airways is present at a facility, then the AF manager would be responsible for the safety and health and the air traffic manager would be responsible for the operations (of the facility). Course a lot of questions arose from this such as:
*What if no airways facility personnel present (such at a smaller facility)?*Since airways facility is becoming more of a self-managed workforce, who is the manager?
Under NAATS/FAA contract, it states under article 57, ‘Occupational Safety & Health’—57- 01; " The Employer shall make every reasonable effort to provide and maintain safe and healthful working conditions." Who is the Employer? The FAA is the employer.
Also the FAA is in the process of updating it’s OSH Program, the 3900.19A, and various drafts have been floating around through headquarters and you may have possibly had the chance to glance at a copy. My only comment is that I want to see the draft in its entirety once all the proposed changes have been made. Plus I do have to ask the question, how come the unions were not involved in the initial changes or even given a chance to be asked for their input?
One last item to cover, reference the issue of new consoles and ergonomics. I am sure that Scott Chapman answered all your questions at the convention but I want to assure you that I will still strive to fight for new consoles and will try to get more statistical data on such as reported cases of carpal tunnel syndrome tendentious, etc. that may be occurring at our facilities...
REMEMBER -- The NAATS hospitality room will be Wednesday night October 29 in the Microbrewery Room from 6 - 8pm.
New Replacement Consoles?
By Scott Chapman, NAATS OASIS representative
The Air Traffic Systems Requirements Service has identified a requirement to replace the existing Model One Full Capacity (M1FC) consoles with new consoles. During the 1996 National Association of Air Traffic Specialists (NAATS) Conference, Mr. Monte Belger, ATS-1, responded to questions regarding the feasibility of using the existing consoles to house the OASIS workstations. NAATS voiced the complaint that the current consoles are poorly designed and are deficient from a human factors point of view."This is a direct quote from a FAA memorandum issued by the Director of Air Traffic System Requirements, ARS-1, Neil Planzer to the Director of Air Traffic Systems Development, AUA-1 dated April 3, 1997. The memorandum goes on further to cite a study which was conducted at Macon and Fort Worth Automated Flight Service Stations. This study recommends that the "OASIS workstation be configured with two 17 inch monitors in a side-by-side configuration. Since the existing M1FC consoles were designed to house 15 inch monitors, considerable re-design and retrofit efforts would be required to accommodate the OASIS monitors, and even then the Human Factors concerns would not be ad-dressed."
And so begins the effort to replace the current brown metal and laminate workstations with newer, commercially available, modern office furniture type workstations. This is the direction in which things are currently headed, but to date no new consoles or workstations have been found. However, this is not to say there has not been any progress made. The goal is to identify and purchase new workstations in time for the delivery of OASIS at the Seattle key site. This is a very ambitious undertaking.
The purchase of replacement consoles is closely tied to OASIS, it is still an entirely separate program. Much of the effort is being worked from within ARU-300, the branch of Air Traffic System Requirements which also has the responsibility for OASIS.
Because I am the NAATS OASIS representative at FAA Headquarters, I have been involved with this effort since the first work-group meeting in late May 1997. The first meeting was to simply identify every piece of equipment currently housed in the present consoles that we could conceivably think of. All types of operational work positions in an AFSS were considered. This resulted in identifying five functionally different types of consoles.
During subsequent meetings the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts was identified as a resource to assist in obtaining new consoles. Volpe has provided preliminary computer design alternatives, layouts and vendor catalogues for the new consoles. Because there are no commercially available products which can easily accommodate all the types of AFSS equipment, some modification will be required. Volpe is also assisting with the repackaging engineering and installation instructions that will need to be done.
Once design approval is obtained from the Flight Service Product Team, a purchase for mockups of the Type 4 (Inflight) and Type 5 (Supervisor) workstations will be made. The intent is to validate that the design is feasible and will further aid in the validation that the Human Factors issues has been resolved. Originally these mockups were to be assembled at the FAA Tech Center in Atlantic City. As it became increasingly difficult to locate all the spare AFSS equipment to put in the mockups, a determination was made to place the mockups at the Millville AFSS.
The Human Factors issue will continue to be a major factor in the selection of the new consoles. So far there has been limited results in this area. A Human Factors expert will be obtained to assist in providing an ergonomically optimal recommendation. Currently, there is a plan to visit up to 3 Automated Flight Service Stations to conduct observations and interviews. A survey to send to the AFSSs is also being discussed.
Suzanne Pellosmaa the NAATS’ OSHA chairperson has been asked to help in the assessment of the data which will be collected in the early phases of the console replacement effort. Because Suzanne also works at the Millville AFSS where the mockups will be located, she will be able to tell us first hand how the specialists in the field perceive the new consoles.
Around the time this article goes to print, the Human Factors/Ergonomics expert should be identified. Site visits and data collection are expected to take place in October and early November. Development of a report and associated briefings are anticipated for early December with a console design recommendation around mid December. If all goes well, the mockups could be at Millville AFSS by February.
1-800-WX-BRIEF
Use It Or Lose It!
Our Address:
This and associated pages and their contents are Copyright � 1998; National Association of Air Traffic Specialists.
All Rights Reserved.This page was last updated on April 13, 1998.
Please send any comments, problems or questions regarding this site to our Webmaster.
