WHITE HOUSE OBJECTS TO JOB COMPETITION REVISIONS

By Amelia Gruber and Jason Peckenpaugh, GovExec.com, November 17, 2003

The White House has raised last-minute objections to measures governing federal job competitions in the conference report on the fiscal 2004 Transportation-Treasury budget bill, and may pressure lawmakers to alter the language, Capitol Hill and industry sources said Monday.

Measures approved by House-Senate negotiators last Wednesday night would make it easier for federal employees to prevail over private firms in job competitions. The provisions would allow in-house teams to submit bids in all A-76 studies where more than 10 jobs are at stake, and would give the agency team a cost advantage.

Last week�s version of the conference report also grants federal employees the right to appeal A-76 decisions to the General Accounting Office. This provision in particular bothers the administration, according to an industry source. "They raised the red flag as soon as they saw the language," the source said.

Though lawmakers completed the conference report last week, they have yet to officially file the report. Sources said OMB and legislators may seek to alter the A-76 provisions if they are incorporated in the omnibus appropriations bill, rather than reopening conference discussions on the Treasury-Transportation bill.

During a Monday interview, Clay Johnson, deputy director for management at OMB, would not confirm that OMB is opposed to competitive sourcing language in the Transportation-Treasury conference report, saying he did not want to comment on the details of any appropriations measures.

Some Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., are opposed to the conference report language, according to Cathy Garman, vice president for public policy at the Contract Services Association.
If signed into law, the conference report would revise job competition rules for the second time this year. Some of the provisions -- particularly one that expands A-76 appeal rights for federal employees -- represent a significant change from current practice.

Federal employee unions applauded the measures, which in their view give civil servants the same A-76 appeal rights enjoyed by private contractors. Unions have long said that federal employee teams should have the ability to appeal A-76 decisions to the General Accounting Office.

"The integrity of the competition process is strengthened when agency decision-makers can be held accountable," said American Federation of Government Employees President John Gage last week in a statement. He also praised the conferees for "ensuring that the in-house workforce will be allowed to compete vigorously."

OMB�s May revisions to Circular A-76, which sets rules for conducting public-private competitions, did not grant civil servants explicit A-76 appeal rights. This is one of seven "egregious problems" with the circular addressed in the Transportation-Treasury conference report, according to a Nov. 13 statement from supportive Democratic lawmakers.

But contractor groups have criticized the provisions since they were announced last week.

Peter Cohn of CongressDaily contributed to this report.

   Survey Says

MITRE/CAASD Flight Service Station Survey: Initial Results

Background of the survey

The Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD) conducted an online survey in support of the FAA�s study of Flight Service Stations. The objective of the Flight Service Station (FSS) survey was to gain a better understanding of how pilots use Flight Service Stations and related services, as well as the expectations they have regarding these services. The survey environment consisted of an interactive online questionnaire.

The question structure of this survey was "dynamic" in nature, where an individual�s path through the survey was dependent upon responses. The dynamic structure format was used to reduce unnecessary questions and limit the time necessary to complete the survey. There were a maximum of 63 questions possible, and a minimum of 27 questions were asked of all participants. The predicted maximum time to complete the survey was estimated to be 20 minutes. To capture the most representative input from the user community, and to eliminate the risk of multiple submissions from one source, respondents were required to be certified U.S. pilots.

The FSS survey collected data on user satisfaction with current FSS services, the importance of specific services, the methods used to obtain flight-related information, and potential areas of improvement for FSS services. Participants were asked questions regarding their flight background and experience as a pilot, their experience with flight service stations, the methods used to obtain flight information, perceptions regarding quality of services and system performance and their interactions with Flight Service Station Specialists.

The goal of this research is to support the FAA�s study of Flight Service Stations by providing pilots with an opportunity to provide inputs regarding: concerns about the future of FSS services (from the user�s perspective); the outcomes the users would like to see from the FSS study; and user expectations about quality and performance in the FSS domain.

All Pilots Surveyed

Total Respondents: 3,550
Average Hours of Flight Experience: 2,320 hours

Overall, 97.2% of the respondents indicated they obtain weather information from Flight Service Stations.

Overall, 54.5% of the respondents indicated that they file flight plans via Flight Service Stations only.

Overall, 35.1% of the respondents indicated they use Flight Service Station services for most flights (or, 75-99% of the time).

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "The current level of service that I receive from FSS meets my expectations"
92.4% of respondents indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "I rely on Flight Service Stations to act as my primary provider of aviation-related National Security information" 86.3% of respondents indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

Overall the three items considered to be MOST IMPORTANT regarding the services received from Flight Service Station (FSS) facilities are:

1. Quality of Information received from FSS (the usefulness of the data): 82.6%

2. Accuracy of the information received from FSS: 54.2%

3. Quality of Service received from FSS (the level of customer service provided by the FSS Specialist): 34.8%

Overall, the three items considered to be the MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT for FSS or FSS-related services are:

1. Improved interactivity with Specialists (one-on-one, Internet, or in-person): 63.4%

2. Enhanced data interpretation: 56.9%

3. Personalization of services (tailoring services to individual experience levels): 46%

Student Pilots

Total Number of Student Pilots: 29
Average Hours of Flight Experience: 540

When asked which systems or services they use to obtain weather information:
100% of Student Pilots indicated that they obtain weather information from Flight Service Stations.

55.2% of Student Pilots indicated that they file flight plans via Flight Service Stations only.

When asked how frequently they use Flight Service Stations services
51.7% of Student Pilots indicated they use FSS services for every flight (or 100% of the time).

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "The current level of service that I receive from FSS meets my expectations" 96.5% of Student Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "I rely on Flight Service Stations to act as my primary provider of aviation-related National Security information" 96.6% of respondents indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

The three items Student Pilots consider to be MOST IMPORTANT regarding the services received from Flight Service Station (FSS) facilities are:

1. Quality of Information received from FSS (the usefulness of the data): 100%

2. Tailoring of services to my individual experience level and needs: 37.9%

2. Unique localized services (specific to the needs of the local area): 37.9%

3. Accuracy of the information received from FSS: 34.5%

3. Quality of Service received from FSS (the level of customer service provided by the FSS Specialists): 34.5%

The three items Student Pilots consider to be the MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT for FSS or FSS related services are:

1. Improved interactivity with Specialists (one-on-one, Internet, or in-person): 55.2%

2. Personalization of services (tailoring services to individual experience levels): 48.3%

3. Enhanced data interpretation: 41.4%

3. Better flight planning tools: 41.4%

Private Pilots

Total Number of Private Pilots: 2,067
Average Hours of Flight Experience: 930

When asked which systems or services they use to obtain weather information:
97.8% of Private Pilots indicated that they obtain weather information from Flight Service Stations.

57.7% of Private Pilots indicated that they file flight plans via Flight Service Stations only.

When asked how frequently they use Flight Service Station services:
36% of Private Pilots indicated they use FSS services for most flights (or 75-99% of the time).

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "The current level of service that I receive from FSS meets my expectations" 94% of Private Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "I rely on Flight Service Stations to act as my primary provider of aviation-related National Security information." 88.9% of Private Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

The three items Private Pilots consider to be MOST IMPORTANT regarding the services received from Flight Service Station (FSS) facilities are:

1. Quality of information received from FSS (the usefulness of the data): 83.5%

2. Accuracy of the information received from FSS: 55.2%

3. Quality of Service received from FSS (the level customer service provided by the FSS Specialist): 35.3%

The three items Private Pilots consider to be the MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT for FSS or FSS-related services are:

1. Improved interactivity with Specialists (one-on-one, internet, or in-person): 63.8%

2. Enhanced data interpretation: 57.4%

3. Personalization of services (tailoring services to individual experience levels): 45.7%

Commercial Pilots

Total Number of Commercial Pilots: 1,375
Average Hours of Flight Experience: 3,290

When asked which systems or services they use to obtain weather information:
96.9% of Commercial Pilots indicated that they obtain weather information from Flight Service Stations.

52.7% of Commercial Pilots indicated that they file flight plans via Flight Service Stations only.

When asked how frequently they use Flight Service Station services:
34.1% of Commercial Pilots indicated they use FSS services for most flights (or 75-99% of the time.)

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "The current level of service that I receive from FSS meets my expectations" 91.1% of Commercial Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "I rely on Flight Service Stations to act as my primary provider of aviation-related National Security information" 84.4% of Commercial Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

The three items Commercial Pilots consider to be MOST IMPORTANT regarding the services received from Flight Service Station (FSS) facilities are:

1. Quality of information received from FSS (the usefulness of the data): 81%

2. Accuracy of the information received from FSS: 54.5%

3. Quality of Service received from FSS (the level of customer service provided by the FSS Specialist): 33.4%

The three items Commercial Pilots Consider to be the MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT for FSS or FSS-related services are:

1. Improved interactivity with Specialists (one-on-one, internet, or in-person): 63.1%

2. Enhanced data interpretation: 57.7%

3. Personalization of services (tailoring services to individual experience levels): 45.5%

Airline Transport Pilots

Total Number of Airline Transport Pilots: 479
Average Hours of Flight Experience: 8,830

When asked which systems or services they use to obtain weather information:
93.5% of Airline Transport Pilots indicated that they obtain weather information from Flight Service Stations.

39.2% of Airline Transport Pilots indicated that they file flight plans via Flight Service Stations only.

When asked how frequently they use Flight Service Station services: 30.1% of Airline Transport Pilots indicated they use FSS services for most flights (75-99% of the time).

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "The current level of service that I receive from FSS meets my expectations" 86.5% of Airline Transport Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

When asked to indicate their level of agreement with this statement: "I rely on Flight Service Stations to act as my primary provider of aviation-related National Security information" 77.6% of Airline Transport Pilots indicated that they Strongly Agree or Agree.

The three items Airline Transport Pilots consider to be MOST IMPORTANT regarding the services received from Flight Service Station (FSS) facilities are:

1. Quality of Information received from FSS (the usefulness of the data): 80.8%

2. Accuracy of the information received from FSS: 48.4%

3. Quality of Service received from FSS (the level of customer service provided by the FSS Specialist): 33.2%

The three items Airline Transport Pilots consider to be the MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT for FSS or FSS-related services are:

1. Improved Interactivity with Specialists (one-on-one, internet, or in-person): 62.6%

2. Enhanced data interpretation: 49.3%

3. Personalization of services (tailoring services to individual experience levels): 48.4%

Geographic Breakdown of FAA Flight Regions

4.1% Indicated Intl, North America (Canada)
3.9% Indicated Intl, Caribbean/Gulf of Mexico & Mexico
1.0% Indicated International, Transatlantic
0.8% Indicated International, Transpacific
0.8% Indicated International, Central/South America
0.4% Indicated "Other"

   OASIS Update

Jeff Barnes, OASIS National Representative, [email protected]

AOPA Expo, Philadelphia

11/12/03 - Life continues to be interesting at headquarters...I look forward to my looming return to sanity. First I want to talk about my experience at the AOPA Expo in PHL a couple weeks ago. It was kind of last minute for us due to all the mess with Continuing Resolutions. Once again the OASIS Demo equipment got placed at the end of the booth instead of front and center as we should have been considering the higher impact we have on GA than the WARP display that got placed there. This is the second time this has happened and I thought I had it cleared up after the last time but it slipped through the cracks. I don�t think that�ll happen again. Another thing I�m unhappy about is how WARP can afford to send 6-8 people there and supply them with shirts to wear each day when OASIS had 2 of us there. We both stayed in the booth almost the entire time because traffic was heavy enough to keep both of us busy a lot of the time...something for Dennis Detrow to address when he puts on the OASIS hat for us in January. I�m not saying we need to fatten up our presence like WARP, but there should be parity. If they don�t reduce their presence to reasonable levels then we do need to be increased to a comparable level. But that�s a rant for the program, not you guys.

Aside from that, we had problems getting the demo system set up the first day. I really felt like an idiot with pilots coming by and asking questions about OASIS while I was desperately trying to get it working. We finally got logged on about 4 hours after the exhibit hall opened. Turned out the problem was due to poor communications and misunderstanding. We�re taking the lessons learned from this and working out ways to avoid the same mistakes in the future. After we got the initial setup going we never had another problem with our connection.

We were hooked into the Tech Center OASIS using the brand new ISD003 software for the demo so we could show pilots some of the neat new features like the graphical TFR overlay and active SUA overlay. This also helped us send our message that OASIS is not a static system. Its open architecture accommodates enhancements and in fact the process of enhancements to the OASIS has been ongoing. As has been the case every time I have demo-ed OASIS to the pilot community, the first question out of everyone�s mouth was "where and when can I see this on my computer?" Of course my answer had to be that you can�t now, and might never be able to for a couple reasons. The first being, of course, the A-76. The FAA won�t commit any money to any Flight Service program that it isn�t forced to due to the uncertainties around A-76. I certainly can�t fault that logic as much as I hate it. The second is that the AOPA has taken a position opposing integration of DUATS into OASIS which makes the likelihood of it happening slim.

75% of Pilots feel AOPA is making a mistake.

When the pilots asked me why AOPA had this position I explained their concern about losing the competitive aspect you get from having two private vendors trying to get customers. They are afraid without the competition that the OASIS-provided DUATS product would become stagnant and would no longer meet the needs of the pilots. This is where the biggest change occurred from the demos we did at AOPA Expo last year. With the improved capabilities of OASIS the pilots did not feel that factor outweighed the benefit of the integration. I would estimate that better than 75% of them said that they felt that AOPA was making a mistake in taking that position and several of them told us they intended to make their opinion heard with Phil Boyer.

Further, we had a visit from one of the other vendors. This gentleman was there to promote the services of his company, which included an online flight planning service. After we talked to him, one by one all the other people from their booth came by to see OASIS. They were all very impressed. One of them went so far as to say that OASIS was by far the best product he had seen for preflight and inflight briefing and with the addition of some flight planning capability an integrated OASIS DUATS would put private services out of business including the one he was there for. He also said that his first concern was getting the best briefing he could and he would accept losing the flight planning part of their business if he could get free access to what he saw in OASIS. The unhappiness with AOPA�s position only increased when we described to the pilots our concept for interactive briefings. To a person they thought the idea was awesome and wished they could look forward to the capability.

AOPA reads this

While I like to think that AOPA reads this when it gets posted to our website, I know that it is largely dismissed by them as propaganda. I think maybe they should see a bit of foreshadowing in it because to all appearances the only way they will ever learn what is really going on in OASIS is by being forced to learn from grassroots pressure by their membership. I know they won�t listen to or regard me. Heck, Melissa Bailey (In AOPA management dealing with government affairs) walked right by the OASIS Demo to the other end of the AUA booth and refused to acknowledge my presence, and the last time I called AOPA to talk about OASIS budget cuts Heidi Williams (AOPA Government Affairs) assured me they thought it was a critical issue and they�d get back to me to discuss it and I never received a call. So my name is mud at AOPA. In a perverse way I�m proud that I�ve been such a thorn in their side that they feel compelled to treat me this bad. Of course I�d much prefer they start dealing with us honestly and stop telling their membership they are working closely with us when they refuse to even acknowledge our presence, much less talk to us, but I have to take my little victories where I can find them.

AAT-2 visits the booth

Wally Pike was at the Expo for a couple days and at one point he brought Linda Schuessler (AAT-2) by our booth for an OASIS demo. She stayed as long as she could before having to leave to participate in a panel. She seemed quite impressed with OASIS and was alert and curious throughout (the rumors that I can put people to sleep talking or writing about OASIS are entirely unfounded....hey...hey...WAKE UP!. Hehe ). I am using this to try to push for more demos of the latest version of OASIS to headquarters management up through the executive level. I think it would help OASIS and more importantly Flight Service if the decision makers have a first hand understanding of what they are making their decisions on. This will be something for Dennis to continue to pursue as he takes over OASIS.

Thanks to John Tollini

My thanks to John Tollini from BNA for attending the AOPA Expo and helping me with the OASIS demos. Normally demos are done by Human Factors Team members because of their knowledge of the system, not only where it is now, but where it�s been and where it�s going. However, an exception was made this time due to the Human Factors Team meeting occurring at the same time. John did a good job for us there.

New Human Factors Team meets

The new Human Factors Team has had its first meeting (unfortunately without Jose Vasquez due to backfill overtime issues. We are working to stop that from happening again). Everything went smoothly with our new members contributing well to the team right out of the gate. We will be working to get them the OASIS training as quickly as possible to get them fully up to speed on OASIS. One of the major issues was the waterfall. At this time the team is at impasse on the selection between SJT and PRC and we are planning to follow the impasse process required by the team charter. It will take some time to complete because it is difficult to find a time when all the members of the impasse panel are available, but we are working the issue. We hope to have the remainder of the waterfall decided on soon. The Human Factors Team has made a recommendation which goes to the Board and ATP for final approval. Once that�s coordinated I will publish it in an OASIS Update. Otherwise the Team worked on prioritizing problems and discussing solutions with Harris engineers while I left Dennis in charge so I could attend the AOPA Expo.

The Human Factors Team will be at the Tech Center next week to do operational testing of the newest software. After that is complete we will put it into CXO with their equipment installation and do another round of testing at CXO to make sure it�s still suitable in an operational environment. I don�t anticipate any problems there, but since so many changes are incorporated into this drop I supported this to ensure it didn�t get deployed with something broken that was missed in testing in a lab environment. Again, I think everything will be okay, but I want to be as sure of it as possible.

Fraternally,
Jeff Barnes

   LIAISON UPDATES

ARS Report

Steve Pollok, ATP Liaison -- [email protected]

NOTAM Short Term Solution (NSTS)

All the facilities (AFSS, towers, and ARTCC) have finished their training on their respective NOTAM systems. Macon AFSS and Cedar City AFSS have been using the NSTS to disseminate both D and L NOTAMs. The acknowledgement/non-acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) message portion of the system has been working well. This is where the system will send a non-acknowledgement message back to the issuing AFSS if the NOTAM message has not been acknowledged within 10 minutes. This has been working well enough that Air Traffic Procedures (ATP) has given the okay for the discontinuance of backup phone calls and faxes to the test facilities. AFSS is not using the NSTS for briefing. We are still waiting for the developer to finish some software improvements and for ATP to give a go-ahead with briefings.

The NSTS developer has made several improvements to the NSTS software. NSTS is now using the Model-1 database, which has corrected some problems that were being experienced with off airway fixes. A new server has been installed which has doubled the processing speed of the system. In recent tests, using local servers, the NSTS has been returning NOTAM information almost instantaneously. In many cases the NSTS has been returning information faster than the Model-1. There does appear to be a problem with the speed when the system is using FIRMNET. In these cases the information is taking around 8-10 seconds to reach the screen. It appears that this is a bandwidth issue and the developer has suggested that the system either use local servers or that the software be redesigned to solve the problem. There also remain some problems with the order in which NOTAMs are being returned for multi-leg routes.

Additionally, money is becoming an issue with the program. At this time, no additional funds have been turned over to ATP and/or the developer. A request for another six months of funding has been made, but no decision has been reached. An Executive Oversight Committee meeting is scheduled in the next couple of weeks and several major decisions, concerning the future of NSTS, are expected.

Integrated Information Display System (IIDS)

A briefing to several of the department heads is scheduled for November.

Aeronautical Information System Replacement (AISR)

This system has turned into a nightmare for the developer and ATP. The system has been placed in the field and has failed to perform. The ARTCCs have been having some major problems. Even the military, which has been using the system for a while, is now having problems. A Union-2 MOA has been given to management is still under review. NATCA is filing an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) on the system and NAATS may follow with a ULP in the near future.

Juneau Airport Wind System (JAWS)

The program is progressing well. A meeting was held in Oklahoma City on October 22 and 23. The meeting dealt with requirements for the system displays for the AFSS, tower, and maintenance. There were representatives present from the unions, the program office, human factors, Alaska-540 (procedures), and Juneau tower and AFSS. A tentative meeting is scheduled for Nov. 4, in Washington, to further discuss procedures for issuing wind shear and turbulence alerts provided by the new LLWAS and JAWS.

Stand Alone Weather System (SAWS)

The debate on the type of display appears to be winding down. A meeting with the Human Factors representatives has eased most of the differences between Human Factors and the rest of the team. It appears that the display will be one with the wind and altimeter using white numbers and the rest of the information being displayed in gray. Some further human factors testing dealing with the readability of the display under various lighting conditions is tentatively planned for GNV AFSS sometime in November.

    CONGRESS REJECTS AMENDMENT TO FILL PAY GAP FOR FEDERAL RESERVISTS

FPMI.com, November 6, 2003

A House-Senate conference committee has rejected an amendment that would require the government to make up the difference between National Guard and Reserve pay and the civilian salary of federal employees called up for duty. House and Senate conferees removed it from the bill to provide financial assistance to Iraq.

"It is clearly unfair to ask the men and women who have volunteered to serve their country, often in dangerous situations, to also face a financial strain on their families," stated John Gage, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "The federal government should alleviate the financial problems faced by many federal employees who serve their nation and must take time off from their jobs when America calls."

Of the 217,000 currently mobilized Guard and Reservists, approximately 14,000 are federal employees. While these individuals receive pay for the time they are on active duty, the salary gap between military duty and civilian work can be considerable. Many state governments and private businesses pay the difference between civilian and military salaries for their employees in the Guard and Reserves.

"The potential impact of this needless hardship on the recruitment and retention of the Guard and Reserves, and the corresponding potential impact on national security, is obvious," said Gage.

The amendment to allow citizen-soldiers to maintain their normal salary when called to active service passed the Senate overwhelmingly, by a vote of 96-3. However, the amendment was stripped in the House-Senate conference committee.

Gage called upon the Senate to reinstate the amendment in the next must-pass bill to be considered by the Senate.

   PWS UPDATE

Mark Jaffe, ASW Regional Director

The PWS team met the week of October 27, in Alexandria, VA, to review the first attempt, by ACA and Grant Thornton, at writing an accurate PWS document for Flight Service.

It was a very disappointing, frustrating week.

Background

To regress a little, NAATS has done everything possible to force ACA to include us in writing the PWS and QASP. We have talked to everyone from Ms. Blakey to Joann Kansier. We have filed a grievance. All to no avail.

Our reasoning is that the PWS and QASP will not be accurate without our input so why write an inaccurate document on the first try (without AT input) and then have to rewrite the entire document to attain accuracy? Ms. Kansier�s answer is, in so many words: "Because I said so."

ACA-1�s "Vision" of Flight Service

I stated, in this meeting, that Joann Kansier has a "vision" for what she has decided Flight Service will look like in the future. She will do her best to assure that the final A-76 product matches her "vision" no matter how many times she has to change, or break, the rules to get there. No one in the meeting, including ACA and Grant Thornton people argued with that assessment of the situation.

So what we were really doing, in this process, was trying to transform Ms. Kansier�s PWS "vision" into a document that accurately demonstrates what we do in Flight Service. One of the largest points of contention is the 7110.10.

Kansier doesn�t want to "burden" contractors with 7110.10 compliance.

The dictionary was written with numerous and continuous references to the 7110.10. Practically every function was denoted with "IAW 7110.10." We (AT PWS team) had to argue, at length, to have this included in the PWS statement to the degree necessary. The problem seems to be that ACA/Kansier do not want a future contractor to be burdened by having to provide flight services in accordance with the 7110.10 and they are trying to find a way for the 7110 to go away. This has been an ongoing battle during the last several months. NAATS insistence that the 7110 can not be ignored vs. ACA�s attempts to figure out a way to get rid of the 7110. At one point, in this meeting, an ACA person stated that there is no guarantee that the 7110 will be binding on a civilian (he must have meant non-federal) employees of the future. I view this as their latest attempt to exempt a future contractor from following the 7110. I wonder how the Air Traffic division, in HQ, will react to this strategy by ACA. Does AT really want a contractor doing flight service functions without the 7110? Can a contractor interact with the other branches of Air Traffic without following the 7110?

The problem that ACA/Kansier are running into is that they want to write a PWS that gives bidding contractors the ability to do this job any way they please. Ms. Kansier�s "vision" of flight service can not be achieved if a contractor has to supply services IAW 7110.10. For her plan to succeed, the 7110 must disappear. My prediction is that somewhere in the PWS, QASP, etc. will be a statement that will allow a bidder to ignore the 7110.

Fewer details in future reports

Almost everything we do with the PWS, from now on, is procurement sensitive so you will get very few details about the accrual PWS document. We spent most of the week rewriting Section 3 of the PWS draft. I won't even try to list all the omissions and inaccuracies that were addressed. To give you an idea of the magnitude of the job you would have to understand how little overall knowledge ACA and Grant-Thornton have about our job. The best example is that when we looked at their description of flight plan services we realized that they completely omitted any reference to VFR flights.

In defense of ACA and GT, they have done an amazing job of trying to learn what we do in Flight Service and, in the year that they have studied us, they have picked up an incredible amount of knowledge and understanding of our job. But as hard as they try, they still don�t know enough to write the PWS and QASP without our help. That is clearly illustrated by the fact that they overlooked the most basic aspect of our job, VFR vs. IFR.

Accuracy not an ACA priority

But then again, accuracy is not a priority to ACA. Their only priority is to finish this study in December of 2004 and maintain Ms. Kansier�s "vision" of Flight Service.

   Minutes

NAATS Board of Directors Meeting

October 7-9, 2003
Four Points Sheraton
Bethesda, MD

Day One -- October 7, 2003

Call to Order
All Directors present.

OASIS Report
Mr. Barnes updated the BOD on OASIS and discussed the two facilities left on the waterfall that had not yet been decided. BOD felt decision it had already selected SJT and did not choose to revisit. Mr. Barnes/Mr. Jaffe suggested, and the BOD agreed, that the HFT be able to adjust the remaining waterfall as necessary with the BOD approval.

Reauthorization of Tech Reps (OASIS/VS)
Replacement for Jeff Barnes as OASIS Tech Rep discussed. This will be a part time representative starting January 1, 2004. Mr. Pike�s recommendation, and the BOD unanimously agreed, that Dennis Detrow from ABQ fill the vacancy.

OASIS Human Factors Team replacements -- Mr. Pike recommended Jose Vasquez, FTW AFSS, replace Dave Hoover as the alternate team lead. The BOD agreed unanimously.

Mr. Pike recommended Steve Jones, MIA AFSS, replace Arnie Holmes. The BOD agreed unanimously.

Mr. Pike recommended that James Banks, FAI AFSS, fill the OHFT vacancy created from the above movements. The BOD agreed unanimously.

OASIS Cadre Training Team discussion -- The process for putting new instructors on the team has been ironed out. Mr. Mounts will send out the process to all Directors again -- action item Mr. Mounts.

Voice Switch
The BOD will make the decision on this position at the January BOD meeting.

Mr. Glowacki briefed the BOD on VS. The voice switch is continuing despite the A-76 process. The equipment needs to be replaced, because the NAS architecture isn�t working. There is currently an investment analysis going on in the Voice Switch program. There is commonality in the program between terminal and flight service, so the agency is looking at the whole package as one switch.
Headset replacement is going well in FTW.


President�s Report
Updates on pay, Mr. Pike will be going out to the field to talk about ratification of the contract in the next few weeks. Congressional issues are still working, it looks like the activity on the hill will not move much for a few weeks and we may end up with another continuing resolution. The longer this is drags out, the more support we�re getting. Our supporters are very firm.

Discussions with NATCA and PASS are going well, nothing new to report.

Working to keep and improve the relationship with NTEU.

ESOP is a company that works between the agency and employees to help employees bid on their own jobs. This is just one company, and we�ll explore some of the options around this issue. There may be legal issues around it, we are just keeping all our options open at this time.

The ATX Liaison position will be filled with Scott Malon, MCN AFSS, and he will serve as the chief negotiator and National LR Representative as well. Mr. Dolan will have an overlap with Mr. Malon through January 2004.

We must fill the National OSHA Representative vacancy. Mr. Pike will advertise for the position in an update and the NAATS News. Action Item Mr. Pike.

Review of IOU�s from previous meeting and discussion on policies.

Motion -- Rescind the standing rule that requires directors to give 8 hours official time per pay period to coordinators. Presented by Mr. Stafford, Second-Ms. Holmes. Discussion. In favor -- Terry, O�Connell, Baker, Holmes, Mounts, and Stafford. Against -- Jaffe, Comisky, and Forte.. Motion passes 6-3.

Chief Negotiator�s Report
A couple of changes to the travel TAU (article 74), Mr. Dolan will get an electronic copy out to the directors. Action Item -- Mr. Dolan.

We need to name CRU-X reps, both national and regional, along with the CRU-X key site. Directors are to give Mr. Dolan the names. Action Item -- Directors.

MOUs
AISR, SUA-ISE, International Weather Briefing. Mr. Dolan advises that it is status quo.

Staffing issues need to be completed, discussion around the distribution of 98 hires for the coming year. The regional offices have to have the clearances and paperwork ready to go so we don�t lose slots at the academy. The Directors will have to get numbers to Mr. Dolan by COB October 17, 2003. Action Item -- Directors.

ATX is now concerned about a large retirement after the first of the year and wants a contingency plan. Mr. Dolan to follow-up. Action Item -- Mr. Dolan.

There are nepotism issues at facilities, Mr. Dolan needs the directors to let him know which facilities are having problems. Action Item -- Directors.

FSDPS staffing is at very low levels. Discussion on if the work can be transferred from facilities for now. Will have to be looked at and if not then it will need to be addressed nationally. Action Item -- Mr. Dolan.

MEO Workgroup Briefing
Discussion on team progress. The team will be going out to regions to talk to members. Overall the process is working well.

The NAATS MEO workgroup members want to continue as elected directors and assign their coordinators other duties as assigned. The two directors would like to keep the national vote with the two acting directors keeping the regional vote and duties.

MOTION -- To rescind the agreement made 6 months ago with Ms. Holmes and Mr. Hoover concerning their participation on the MEO. Offered Mr. Comisky, Second Mr. Terry. Discussion. VOTE -- In Favor - unanimous. Motion passes.

Liaison Reports
ARS Liaison -- Steve Polok discussed several ARS programs:

NOTAM Short Term Solution (NSTS) has been turned on at CDC and MCN with a few problems to work out. The system is still up and running and being tested for problems.

Integrated Information Display System little progress to date.

OASIS/DUATS integration not recommended by ARS due to cost of $25-30 million. Final decision may be delayed until December 2004 after the A-76 decision.

Tape Retention, the NTSB requested FAA to retain digital tapes for 90 days. Just keeping the tapes, not logs or strips.

International Flight Plans proposal to automatically number and acknowledge ICAO flight plans.

Juneau Airport Wind System (JAWS) is spending $6 million (2004) on the project to be fielded sometime by the end of 2004. Testing until the end of 2005.

Stand Alone Weather System (SAWS), GNV is the test site for flight service. One unit per AFSS planned but there should really be 2 used per facility. Follow-up Human Factors testing at GNV planned for sometime in November.

FSOSC
Kevin Carl and Jim Meehan briefed the BOD on their issues:
TODS system; some of the problems are the connectivity - FSOSC is not a 24/7 operation and there need to be more units at facilities. The connectivity problem should be fixed shortly. Both Mr. Carl and Mr. Meehan are on call for presidential and national security NOTAMS. They have to quality control the information that comes out of airspace.

AISR is a failure, NAATS is ready to file a ULP over the situation. Still unsure when the program will be fixed. Action Item -- Mr. Dolan.

Day Two -- October 8, 2003

9:00 am -- Call to Order

All Directors present.

Close Out of Issues from Day One.
Directors need to notify new OASIS HFT Members. Action Item Directors.

Budget
Motion --To amend BOD policies and substitute administrator for treasurer to maintain a record of leave taken by all staff. Presented by Mr. Hoover, Second Mr. Baker. Discussion. Vote-unanimous. Motion Passes. Policy.

The BOD will go over the budget and then amend/accept financial policies when finished.

Ms. Holmes - Discussion on amending subsistence expense to coincide with FAA policies.

Motion --To amend BOD policies to prepare a package that takes into consideration the two national positions subsistence/stipend tax liability to be presented at the January 2004 BOD meeting. Offered by Ms. Holmes, Second Mr. Jaffe. Discussion. In Favor - Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Baker, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover, Mr. Mounts, Mr. Stafford. Opposed -- Mr. Terry. Motion Passes 8-1 -- action item Ms. Holmes.

Discussion on changing the policy to clarify how the imprest funds are calculated. No changes to the current policy from $30.00 per AFSS and 5 other FSS facilities in Alaska for communication expenses. Mr. Hoover clarified the policy; no further action taken.

Motion -- To clarify the $30.00 communication expense applied to each region applies to only AFSS not FSS. Offered Mr. Comisky, no second. Motion fails due to no second.

Motion - Stipends for Regional Coordinators should be based on a 50% rate of the Directors stipend. Offered -- Mr. Mounts, second Mr. Comisky. Discussion. In Favor -- Mr. Baker, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Mounts. Opposed -- Mr. Terry, Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Stafford, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes. Abstain -- Mr. Hoover. Motion Fails 3-5-1.

Discussion on the need to include the Command Center in the Eastern Region Training allotment for total of 10 facilities -- BOD agreement. Alaska region training needs to count 12 possibly 13 need to check on ANC FSDPS to see if it�s included -- Action Item Mr. Baker.

Motion -- A bonus be given to Ms. DeStefano of $500.00 and Ms. Gordon of $300.00. Offered -- Mr. Hoover, Second Mr. Terry. Discussion . In Favor -- Mr. Terry, Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Hoover, Mr. O�Connell, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Comisky, Mr. Stafford, Mr. Mounts. Opposed -- none. Absent- Mr. Baker. Motion passes 8-0, 1 absent.

Motion -- In recognition for any documented savings in excess of $1000.00 as verified by the administrator, any NAATS Employee may be awarded 10 percent of the savings as determined at the annual budget board meeting. Offered -- Mr. Jaffe, second Mr. Comisky. Discussion. In Favor -- Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Baker, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Mounts, Mr. Stafford. Opposed -- Mr. Terry, Mr. Hoover. Motion passes 7-2. Policy.

Proposal to apply above policy to Ms. DeStefano in the amount of a gain sharing bonus of $741.00. Discussion. In Favor -- Mr. Terry, Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Mounts, Mr. Stafford. Opposed -- Mr. Baker. Abstained -- Mr. Hoover. Proposal passes 7-1-1. BOD Decision.

Motion -- Increase the NAATS per diem rate to $50.00 per day. Offered -- Mr. Jaffe, Second, Mr. Baker. Discussion. In favor Mr. Baker, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Stafford. Opposed Mr. Terry, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover, Mr. Mounts, Mr. O�Connell. Motion fails 6-3.

Motion -- Increase the NAATS mileage rate to $.36 per mile. Offered -- Mr. O�Connell, Second Mr. Baker. Discussion. In Favor Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Baker, Mr. Stafford. Opposed Mr. Terry, Mr. Comisky, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover, Mr. Mounts. Abstaining Mr. Jaffe. Motion fails 3-5-1.

Budget discussed line by line.

Motion -- To adopt the budget. Offered by Mr. Stafford, Second Mr. Jaffe. In favor-Unanimous. Motion passes.

Open Topics
Contract training -- Discussion on dates and locations. BOD decision to conduct training in Las Vegas Tues/Wed Dec 16/17, 2004 if contract ratified. Training will be reviewed and additional classes conducted as necessary.

BOD meeting -- Dates and places
January meeting week of January 26-30, location New Orleans.

April meeting April 5/6 in Las Vegas.

July meeting week of 12th in Washington DC. Mr. Malon will coordinate the Drug and Alcohol meeting.

October meeting week of the 4th, in San Francisco.

Day Three -- October 9, 2003

Call to Order
All Directors present

9:05 am -- Executive Session

Open Topics
Motion -- NAATS no longer support any AOPA Functions or advertise in any AOPA publication due to AOPAs total lack of support for NAATS; this effective November 02, 2003. Offered -- Mr. Stafford, Second Mr. Jaffe. Discussion. In favor -- Mr. Terry, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Comisky, Mr. Mounts, Mr. Stafford. Opposed -- Mr. O�Connell, Mr. Baker, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover. Policy. Motion fails.

Mr. Stafford appeals the Chair ruling that the above motion is a policy. Second Mr. Comisky. Discussion. In Favor -- Mr. Terry, Mr. Baker, Mr. Jaffe, Mr. Comisky, Mr. Mounts, Mr. Stafford. Opposed -- Mr. O�Connell, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover. Chair ruling is overturned and above motion is adopted as a standing rule.

Mr. Hoover will send a list of new policies and standing rules to the office administrator to distribute to the BOD. Action Item -- Mr. Hoover.

Budget answers -- Alaska Training allowance will be 12 facilities to include ANC FSDPS. Mr. Lackman is going to prepare a tax package on the stipend issue. Action Item -- Mr. Lackman. There do need to be receipts for training and imprest funds.

Administrator�s Report.
Convention update -- The hotel is set up and a flyer has been sent out with the details. Tentative training for the FacReps will encompass FLRA training/Contract training, providing the new contract is ratified. NAATS will invite several people to speak, as soon as that is confirmed the information will be provided. The standing rule for travel to the convention up to $200.00 is still in effect.

The office will check into Personnet for use by the directors. Action Item -- Ms. Breen.

Receipts are necessary for the initial regional training funds.

Old office computers will go to Great Lakes/Alaska/Western Pacific/New England. The NAATS office will ship them out. Action Item -- Ms. Breen.

Open Topics (cont.)
FTW AFSS has a web page with links for HR issues. There will be a link to the NAATS web page. Mr. Jaffe will get information out to the BOD. Action Item -- Mr. Jaffe.

Discussion on field HR questions and the necessity to ensure this information is provided. Ms. Breen will send an update out to the membership in the next week on the class she attended on HR issues. She will also be working the HR in FAA HQ to get more information out to the field to help get folks the information they need. Action Item -- Ms. Breen.

PWS Report
Mr. Jaffe briefed the BOD that the PWS team is not getting the FAA support they need to help write the PWS and QASP. The management answer to data collection is a survey to the field which has been changed from what the PWS team had agreed upon. The facilities need to make sure they are answering the PWS survey and not the MEO survey. The Air Traffic Management side of the team is very supportive of the concerns, the ACA side isn�t.

Regional Training Policy -- Ms. Holmes would like to get a clarification on receipting the funds. Does the Director have to receipt for the whole amount? Response - Receipt the first half and second half will be provided as consistent with our policy.

Mr. Consalvo discussed the need for a message for the AOPA convention in PHL. Agreement that we need to get the message out that the FAA has promised equal to or better service and has failed to do so. Action Item -- Mr. Consalvo.

Legal Counsel
Arthur Fox briefed the BOD on various legal activities. Unanimous BOD agreement that NAATS will take the MCN ULP to the appeals court.

All Directors present except Mr. Comisky.

Open Topics (cont.)
Contingency Plan -- Discussion on the recognized need for various plans. NAATS HQ will take the IOU on what contingency plans might be available for the MEO/Vendors. Action Item -- Mr. Pike.

Alaska will take the IOU on what contingency plans might be available for Alaska. Action Item -- Mr. Baker.

Mr. Hoover made a statement to the BOD.

2:40pm Quorum lost, Mr. Comisky, Mr. Hoover, Mr. Stafford, and Mr. Mounts absent.

2:50pm Session, all Directors present except Mr. Comisky, Mr. Hoover, and Mr. Stafford.

Steve Glowacki will be the interim OSHACOM National rep for now, the Directors need to get a regional rep name to Steve. Action Item Directors.

Motion to adjourn, offered Mr. Jaffe second Ms. Holmes. Motion passes 6-0, Mr. Comisky, Mr. Hoover and Mr. Stafford absent. Meeting adjourned.

   U.S. SENATE FAILS TO FORCE VOTE ON AVIATION BILL

YahooNews.com, November 17, 2003

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican leaders failed Monday to force a vote in the Senate on a long-stalled aviation bill as Democrats pressed for guarantees to restrict privatization of more air traffic control centers.

A so-called cloture motion to limit debate and hold a vote on the $60 billion bill that sets out aviation priorities for the next four years failed 45-43. Proponents needed 60 votes to bring the measure to the Senate floor.

But there was optimism among several lawmakers that negotiations with the Bush administration would yield a temporary moratorium on privatizing more air traffic centers and break the legislative deadlock as early as Tuesday.

Senate Democrats are outraged that a Republican-led House-Senate negotiating committee stripped language from the final version of the bill passed by both houses this summer that would have prohibited the Federal Aviation Administration from contracting out more air traffic jobs.

President Bush threatened to veto the bill if labor protection provisions were not removed from the final bill.
More than 200 air traffic towers at small airports are operated by private contractors and the FAA wants the flexibility to expand that program by 69 towers although no timetable has been set.

Labor groups led by the air traffic controllers union have waged a fierce lobbying campaign to prevent new contract towers at small- and medium-sized airports, arguing the latest plan is the first step toward privatizing the entire system.

The controllers say that would compromise aviation safety, but the Transportation Department says contract towers do not compromise safety and operate more efficiently.

   AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ATPAC�s 113th meeting was held the week of October 20th, 2003. The meeting was in Herndon, VA., at the Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC). The ATCSCC became operational in May 1994 and was designed to balance air traffic demand with system capacity. We toured the control room at the facility. Bruce Johnson, AAT-1, addressed this meeting and pledges his support when possible.

Sixteen Areas of Concern (AOCs) were discussed at this meeting.

Action Complete:

1. 250KT Speed Exemption Test at IAH - ATPAC raised this AOC in July 1997. Since then, three recommendations have been made by ATPAC concerning safety issues. We basically wanted the test to be delayed or stopped until further risk analysis could be done. A letter from Flight Standards has been sent to Air Traffic asking that the 250KT Test be discontinued.

AOCs Not Adopted:

2. Consolidation of ATC Positions During Low Visibility Conditions - ATPAC raised this AOC in April 2001. The 7210.3 speaks to consolidating positions. ATPAC recommended a change to the 7210.3 to include weather as a consideration when combining positions. The FAA did not adopt this recommendation.

3. Pilot Deviation Notification - ATPAC raised this AOC in April 2001. The 7110.65 gives controller phraseology to be used when speaking to pilots about deviations. ATPAC recommended a change to the 7110.65 to "soften" the phraseology. The FAA did not adopt this recommendation.

Official Recommendation:

4. Clarification of "Direct" Clearance - ATPAC raised this AOC in July 2003. Some confusion exists when clearance is "direct" to a place where the airport and VOR share the same spoken name but are not co-located. Many suggestions were made to make changes to the 7110.65 and the AIM. However, a program started several years ago to change the spoken names and identifiers of VORs that were not co-located at the airport. The program stopped before the work was completed. ATPAC recommends getting a status report on the program from the FAA and researching the requirements to continue it.

Pending Document Change Proposals:

5. Gate Holding Due to Departure Delays - AIM, AIP

6. Taxi Instructions While Clearing Runway - 7110.65

7. Cleanup of typos and errors - AIM, AIP

8. Conflict between FAR31-129(l) and AIM 4-3-20 a and b - AIM, AIP

9. Cleanup Para 4-4-9 concerning Class B Airspace - AIM

Deferred AOCs:

10. Runway Incursions by Taxiing Aircraft

11. Instrument Approach Clearances to other than IAF

12. Clarification of Intent of "Radar Required" Notes on IAPs

13. ICAO Phraseology Change to PANS and AIM

14. Assignment of 7700 for Weather Avoidance

15. Entry and Dissemination of PIREPS - This AOC was raised in October 1999. ATPAC has recommended that the FAA improve the collection and dissemination system with a common database for controllers, pilots, and dispatchers. Our agenda for this meeting included a briefing from someone in ATP-300 to update the group on status however, the briefing did not occur.

16. NOTAM Distribution - This AOC was raised in May 1998. ATPAC recommended that the FAA should channel its limited resources into developing a plain text system that integrates all NOTAMS into a single system. The system should model the existing DOD Internet NOTAM System as a replacement for all NAS users.

Gary Bobik, ATP-300, gave us an update on the NOTAM Short Term Solution (NSTS). I also spoke with the NAATS Air Traffic Procedures liaison, Jim Perkins. Testing is now being conducted in Cedar City and Macon. Also, some interface testing is being conducted between Boise and Salt Lake Center.

A software problem has surfaced that concerns the 56-day update. A fix is already in the works and Jim felt the problem should be resolved around the beginning of November.

The schedule for installation is basically the opposite of the schedule for installation of OASIS. Jim says the FAA Air Traffic Procedures people are very supportive of the NSTS. However, it�s the usual story from the FAA money people.

Jim will be returning to the field toward the end of the year and I�d like to take this opportunity to thank him for a job well done.

It seems there are many people at my facility that don�t know what NSTS is. I thought that maybe a thumbnail view could clear this up. NSTS is basically the solution designed to remedy the NOTAM problems at facilities while they are waiting to get OASIS. Entering NOTAM D info into M1FC will be unchanged and NOTAM L info will also be entered into M1FC and have a new numbering system. AFSSs, terminals and centers will have new equipment installed and when any NOTAMs are entered at an AFSS, info will automatically go to the terminals and centers. Coordination between facilities will be greatly reduced.

The briefer will have one new monitor only, no additional keyboard. The data for the briefing entered into M1FC will be the same. The NOTAMS will appear on the new monitor. Presidential TFRs will be listed first, then the other TFRs. They will be in red. Departure airport D NOTAMS will be next in black, then departure airport L NOTAMS in yellow. Destination airport D NOTAMS next in black, then destination L NOTAMS in yellow. These will be followed by other relevant NOTAMS for the route. Each NOTAM will be indented and much easier to read. There is no fifty-five-page limit. There will be no page forwarding because the scrolling method will be used. Military and ICAO NOTAMS will be available by simple "VM" request instead of "NS RQ, etc." I am not the expert on NSTS but hopefully this may answer some questions.

The next meeting is scheduled for January in Sacramento. Please contact me with questions or concerns at: [email protected].

    BUSH OK�S AGENCIES TO EASE RETURN OF RESERVISTS

OPM�s James Provides Guidance to Agencies on Being Model Employer for Returning Military Reservists

President George W. Bush issued a memorandum requiring agencies to take actions to ease the return of military reservists to their civilian federal jobs. In that memorandum, the President directed executive departments and agencies to grant five days of uncharged leave from civilian duties to federal employees returning from active duty.

Kay Coles James, director of the Office of Personnel Management, issued guidance to department and agency heads on implementing the President�s order. James stated, "Many of our employees have endured great disruption to their families and their normal lives as a result of their service in the war against terrorism. Therefore, I join the President in urging that agencies do everything possible to ease their return to civilian life."

In recognition of the sacrifices activated civilian employees have made, the President directed that all agencies grant five work days of excused absence, without charge to leave, for employees returning to federal civilian employment. This request covers all employees who were activated for military service in connection with Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

In addition to explaining the excused leave policy, James� memo provides guidance to agencies on the requirement to reinstate reservists who apply for reemployment within specified time limits. Further information on requirements for agencies with returning reservists can be found at http://www.opm.gov/ oca/compmemo/2001/2001-09A.asp.

    THE LITTLE BIG FLICK

By Don Brown, AvWeb.com Columnist

Say Again?

One of the less pleasant aspects of my job is the fact that I occasionally have to work a midnight shift. The biggest challenge for me (besides staying awake) is finding something useful to do. Fortunately my Area doesn�t have a freighter operation (yet) so I spent the quiet parts of the shift trying to gather some thoughts to share with you about some big-picture items.

Back in the brown-shoe days, when controllers used to talk about having "the flick," management was fond of telling controllers that they didn�t have "The Big Flick." Whenever a lowly controller would question why we were being asked to do something that seemed stupid, the response was, "You don�t understand because you don�t have The Big Flick." That was probably true in many cases but controllers always suspected it was true of the people that were using the phrase too.

All this is just a round about way of admitting that I don't have The Big Flick. I do have the flick in my own little corner of the air traffic world, though. You and I see what the folks that supposedly have The Big Flick have to say about ATC (and the aviation industry) in the newspaper and other media outlets. This is how I see things from the opposite side of the spectrum.

A Short History Lesson

Air Traffic Control isn�t an old occupation. Aviation itself is just 100 years old. It�s amazing how much knowledge can be lost it that short period of time. I read somewhere that it's hard to know where you�re going if you don�t know where you've been. I don�t know if that is true or not but I liked the way it sounded.

Where should we start? About 1934 I believe. The first people to operate a tower were city employees. The first people to operate what we would think of as a Center were airline employees. Interesting, no? It is if you remember that "privatization" is all the rage now. Been there and done that. It didn't work well. The airlines knew it. That�s why they asked the federal government to run it.

Two of the major reasons were standardization and financial stability. It kept the rules and regulations for New York the same as they are for Montana. If you think the FARs are convoluted, imagine what 50 sets of State Air Regulations would look like. The federal government also had the financial resources to install the infrastructure nationwide. Private industry didn't have any qualms about installing equipment in New York but they were a little reluctant to pay for it in Montana.

Send in the Calvary -- Military ATC

Another old idea that has recently cropped up is transferring ATC into the Department of Defense. No, I�m not kidding. If you haven�t been keeping up with the fight over the current FAA funding bill in Congress (NewsWire, Oct. 27), you�ve been missing quite a show. I�ll let others debate about the politics. I�m just mentioning it for the historical context. Prior to the creation of the FAA, the DoD basically ran its own ATC system. The CAA (Civil Aeronautics Administration) ran the civilian ATC system.

Most people remember that the Grand Canyon mid-air collision in 1956 sparked the debate that created the FAA. What ended the debate were two other mid-air collisions. Both were military vs. civilian airliners -- one in April and one in May. May 20, 1958 to be exact. On May 21st, Senator Mike Monroney introduced a bill that created the FAA.

That was the Federal Aviation Agency by the way. It became the Federal Aviation Administration at a later date. In case you�re wondering where I get this stuff, I read it in "The FAA Historical Chronology." I�m weird like that. I read stuff that just bores other people to tears.

The Trouble with Training

Just yesterday, I signed for a written briefing sheet that stated we could expect more requests from the military for VFR advisories. The reason stated was that there has been an increase in near mid-air collisions between military aircraft operating VFR and civilian aircraft. Why are we getting written briefings instead of getting briefed (verbally) during team training? You know, training in an environment that allows for some questions, discussion and (heaven forbid) some feedback for FAA management.

You probably remember me telling you we don�t have the staffing to have team training. So what makes anyone with The Big Flick think that we have the extra bodies to increase our "additional services" workload (see FAA 7110.65 if you don�t remember the term "additional services") to the biggest user of the National Airspace System?

It kind of makes you wonder doesn�t it? It makes controllers wonder. But we don�t have The Big Flick.

Obviously, I believe we should be offering these additional services. Even if I didn�t read ancient history, I am a safety rep., so I do read recent history. I know that one of the recent incidents resulting in this new guidance was an F-117 vs. a B757 at the Southern California Tracon (SCT). (You can read about it here.) It�s an important safety service. But how are we going to comply with the policy without the controllers to handle the workload?

Fire On the Mountain

Speaking of SCT and recent incidents, did you catch the news (NewsWire, Oct. 30) that the facility had to be evacuated during the massive wildfires in California? I bet that was interesting. I suspect you�ll be hearing a lot of second-guessing about the FAA�s decision to consolidate several Approach Controls into a single facility at SCT. Instead of a natural disaster wiping out one Approach Control, it�s now possible to lose (in effect) several in one shot.

In case you�re wondering how that works, the overlaying Center (Los Angeles Center, in this case) takes over most (if not all) of SCT�s airspace. Talk about interesting: Center controllers working approaches in the L.A. Basin. They made it work (like we always do) but I bet it was a lot like sausage making. I�m glad I didn�t have to watch it being done.

If you�re looking at The Big Flick you�d be wondering where Los Angeles Center (ZLA) found the bodies to make it work. But if you�re looking at the "little flick" like me, you�d be wondering how that guy working an aircraft on an approach he�s never worked before was making it work. Did he have the NAVAID depicted on his scope? I�d be willing to bet money he didn�t have the Minimum Enroute Altitudes (MEAs) depicted on his scope. Airways with published transitions to all the approaches would have made it much simpler, but as I�ve ranted before, not many people are filing airways. Not to mention most approach controls airspace is being redesigned seemingly without a thought as to how it would be worked without being able to vector aircraft at the Minimum Vectoring Altitude on a radar scope without a radar map that depicts all the obstacles.

It�s doable of course. But everything takes a few seconds longer to make sure the controllers are doing it right. Time is a luxury we never seem to have.

Precision vs. Flexibility -- Q-Routes

Another Big Flick item that gets a lot of attention these days is precision. Whenever the discussion comes around to Free Flight, Required Navigational Performance (RNP) or any other program that looks to the future you hear about how much more precise the navigational and surveillance equipment will be. For instance, I signed for a briefing (yes, another written briefing) on "Q-routes" the other day. I first heard about these routes at Communicating for Safety last year.

As I sat listening to the briefing (at Communicating for Safety) I was just astounded. Using RNP, we're looking at designing routes that are just incredibly close to each other. Don�t quote me on it but the example I remember was three parallel routes up and down the middle of California. I believe the centerlines of the routes were going to be 8 miles apart. Like I said, don�t quote me on that number.

The point is that the routes are going to be very close and the required navigation performance for the aircraft to be able to fly those routes (and remain separated) was going to be very high indeed. Speaking of high, so was the price tag. I believe it was $500,000 for the most sophisticated navigational equipment. Per airplane.

Anyway, the guys with The Big Flick were looking at how many more airplanes could be run through the same amount of airspace if we could just be more precise. I, without the benefit of having The Big Flick, was sitting there wondering how this would work during the thunderstorm season into Atlanta (ATL). Three guys on parallel routes inbound to ATL and the middle guy decides he needs to deviate around a buildup dead-ahead.

I assume the bean counters aren�t going to shell out a half million bucks and only be able to use the equipment in California. I assume they�ll start looking at Georgia too. I wonder if anyone at ZLA is thinking of how they'll get the planes into a holding pattern the next time there�s a wildfire at SCT?

Bad Attitude

It sounds like I have a bad attitude about it all this, doesn't it? That's something I�d like someone with The Big Flick to explain to me. How do you take a great career -- a career that everybody starts out loving -- and turn it into a job we love to hate? I don�t think that particular talent is unique to FAA management, by the way. I see the same contradictory emotions in many professional pilots. It does seem as if the FAA has institutionalized it, though.

Pilots love to fly. Controllers love to control. Nothing makes my day quite like running a good inbound push into CLT or running a few simultaneous approaches at the Wilkes sector. It�s still a challenge. It�s still exciting. It�s still fun.

But it�s become frustrating. Instead of being the exception, the exception now is actually being able to do a good job. I can�t fool myself into thinking I�m doing a good job when I miss a gap on the inbound push or one of the guys on approach blows through the localizer. I don�t feel like I�m doing a good job when a jet levels a 10,000 because I�m on the phone trying to coordinate. It never enters my mind that I�ve saved the taxpayers thousands upon thousands of dollars by working shorthanded. I bet if you�re the guy going through the localizer it doesn�t enter your mind either.

Don�t Mind the Mule -- Just Load the Wagon

Have you ever been flying along, listening to a controller that is way too busy, and thought to yourself, "Now that is what I call productivity! I bet he�s issuing 10 clearances a minute. I wonder if we could increase that to 11 a minute so my tax bill will go down?" I didn�t think so. Yes, I know it�s questions like that that makes FAA managers think I have a bad attitude.

I don�t think doing a job cheaply will ever provide the job satisfaction that doing a job well provides. Perhaps job satisfaction isn't all that important in the greater scheme of things. But if job satisfaction isn�t important, the FAA wouldn�t be spending money that they saved on (yet another) employee attitude survey. Or would they? I�m confused.

Cheep, Cheap, Cheep

One thing I�m not confused about: I never hear the word "cheap" used in a serious conversation about safety. You never see "cheap" used in any slogans. It�s not "Safe, Orderly and Expeditious (as long as it�s cheap)" is it? I know that no one in NATCA ever proposed the slogan "Safety Above All as long as it�s cheap."

The only time I ever hear the word "cheap" is when someone is trying to sell me something. Invariably it�s something that I don�t really want and probably don�t need. I guess it�s a good thing I�m a controller because I don�t think I could ever make a living as a salesman.

Older But Not Wiser

I thought that the older I got the more things would make sense. Instead, I find myself confronted with more and more contradictions. These are the kind of things I dwell on during the long nights. I thought wisdom might come with age but I have yet to find any.

We are blessed with the finest Air Traffic Control system in the world. How that came to be with the FAA in charge of it may be one of aviation�s greatest mysteries. Controllers are being tasked with working more and more airplanes yet there are fewer and fewer controllers to accomplish the mission. Now we�re looking at the Department of Defense as a solution although they�re already stretched thin.

In a contradiction wrapped inside a contradiction, we�re looking at the most "inherently governmental" branch of the government (the DoD) to solve a fight that started because someone decided that ATC wasn�t "inherently governmental." Precision is touted as the next big thing when Mother Nature and Mr. Murphy remind us daily that we need flexibility.

Civil Service

I guess I really don�t have The Big Flick because I just feel confused. And nothing confuses me more than this: What�s up with all this talk of "acting more like a business" and "customer service?" It makes me nervous because it sounds like someone is trying to sell something. Something we probably don�t want and definitely don't need. The FAA isn�t a business -- it�s the government. Your government. Why would anyone willingly accept a demotion from citizen to customer?

I hope some of you will take the time to explain that to me and your other government employees. While we're still your employees. Somehow I don�t think we�ll be having these discussions once I�m working for a business and you�ve been legislated down to the status of customer.

About the Author: Don Brown is an air traffic controller at Atlanta ARTCC, as well as a Facility Safety Representative with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.

 RESUM�S REQUESTED

If you are interested in serving as a national NAATS representative on either liaison details or workgroups please send your resume to NAATS HQ. Details are in Washington, DC at FAA HQ and are for one year. Workgroups meet as necessary and require varying degrees of travel. It would be helpful if you would list your area(s) of interest in your resume, e.g., automation/equipment, operations/personnel, etc.

   Convention

 NAATS 2004 NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING

April 07 -- April 08, 2004
Monte Carlo Resort and Casino
3770 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, NV 89109
Reservations Phone: 800-311-8999 or 702-730-7000
Room Rate - $79.00 single/double occupancy
Group Code - XNAATS4 w One night�s deposit needed
Cancellation -- 48 hours prior to arrival w Block of rooms will be released 03/15/04
Board of Directors Meeting -- April 5, -- April 6, 2004
Facility Rep Training -- April 6, 2004
Reception -- April 7, 2004

Southwest Airlines
Southwest Airlines offers up to 10% off most (Southwest does not discount government or promotional fares) fares for air travel to and from the National Meeting, with the convenience of Ticketless Travel! To qualify, call Southwest Airlines Group and Meetings Reservations at 800-433-5368 and reference ID CODE -- G0245. Reservations Sales Agents are available 7:00 a.m. -- 8:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, or 8:30 a.m. -- 5:30 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, Central Standard Time.

Travel dates are anytime starting March 31, 2004 and ending April 14, 2004.

  FEDERAL EMPLOYEE NEWS

Brought to you by FedWeek.com

Some Common Ground on Contracting Policy

Although the House and Senate took differing approaches to the government's contracting-out policy in passing their versions of the Transportation-Treasury bill (S-1589 and HR-2989), some provisions are common to both bills and thus stand the best chance of emerging from a conference and being presented to the White House. The House voted to bar the use of revised guidance under Circular A-76 that the administration issued early this year and the Senate narrowly defeated a similar amendment; however, as part of the DoD authorization bill, House-Senate conferees agreed to bar using the new rules at the Defense Department-which conducts the large majority of A-76 studies-until the Pentagon issues a report on the potential effect on competitions there. Also, several provisions in the Senate version of the appropriations bill would address some of the concerns raised by opponents of the revised rules. For example, one Senate provision would restore the old policy of allowing work to be contracted out only if the private sector bid is at least 10 percent below the in-house bid. Other provisions would overturn the new policy�s requirement that in-house functions be re-competed automatically every five years after winning a competition and would restore certain employee appeal rights that the new policy would revoke. Both versions also would impose new reporting requirements designed to allow Congress to keep a closer watch on contracting-out activities. A veto threat hangs over the attempt to soften the contracting-out policy.

FEHB Open Season Ahead

The annual open season in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program runs November 10-December 8, providing the chance for eligible persons to join the program or to change plans or coverage levels. While most enrollees stick with their coverage from one year to the next, several changes bear watching, officials say. The average increase in premiums will be 10.6 percent, but within that figure there is a wide variation. Premiums in 39 percent of the plans are increasing by more than 15 percent and those in another 39 percent are increasing by less than 10 percent, with the remainder falling in the 10-15 percent range. In addition, three plans have eliminated options and eight health maintenance organizations are dropping out. With new plans joining, though, the total number of plans is increasing from 188 to 205, the first growth in the program in five years. In addition, some HMOs are offering new options.

"As a general aviation pilot and instructor for over 40 years, I understand the important safety function that our air traffic control system provides. Therefore, I supported an amendment that would prohibit the FAA from contracting out air traffic controller positions, systems specialists, technicians and flight service employees."

Regional Supplements

ALASKA REGION

CENTRAL REGION

EASTERN REGION

GREAT LAKES REGION

NEW ENGLAND REGION

NORTHWEST MOUNTAIN REGION

SOUTHERN REGION

Tom Forte, Acting Director and Richard Anderson, Acting Coordinator

Dave, Scott Malon and I attended arbitration training on October 6 in Bethesda Maryland. The training is necessary to prepare us for what appears to be several arbitrations in the near future.

The October Board of Directors meeting was held in Washington D.C. on October 7th, 8th, & 9th. The main issue discussed was the 2004 budget. After many long hours of work, cuts, and innovative ideas the BOD succeeded in coming up with a sound budget for the coming year. All of the official minutes are available on the national website.

As many of you know we have numerous issues in the region at this time. A lot of managers think that we are on our way out, so they don�t have to deal with us anymore. Not true! No matter what happens, we are a federal union with all the rights entitled to a federal union and they have no choice but to accept that right up to the last minute if that is what the future holds for us. The way we achieve this to hold them strictly to the contract.

When they break a rule, follow the process and file the necessary paperwork, whether it�s a grievance or ULP. It never hurts to talk to your managers and attempt to work these issues before they get to the filing stage, which brings up another point. Stop wasting time talking to the Supervisors, the OM�s, the AATM, or the facility janitor, unless the ATM has given them negotiating rights and you have the letter from the ATM giving them this right. Most of them are giving their opinions and it only serves to cloud the issue. You�re the FacRep. Deal directly with the ATM.

I would recommend that everyone pay particular attention to your job performance. We�ve had several incidents where management is coming after the employees for making mistakes on position. They are attempting to get it into the discipline arena since they have repeatedly proven they know little if anything about training and quality assurance. Protect yourselves and do everything by the book!

Around the Region:

BNA AFSS: FacRep Mike Ramsey retired on September 30th. Dave and I attended the ceremony and dinner in his honor where Nashville has developed their own special way of sending someone off into retirement. We presented him with a plaque from NAATS-Southern Region during this unique and memorable ceremony. We�re going to miss you Mike.

GNV AFSS: Trouble brewing on the EEO front in the facility again. Hope the ATM or the Region can curtail this before the FAA has to pay out more money though another EEO lawsuit!

MCN AFSS: An arbitration hearing was held in Macon on October 22 over Macon management�s refusal to bargain a change in working conditions at the facility. The Union�s advocate was Scott Malon, who presented the union�s case. Witnesses for the union and management were heard from and the case is now in the hands of the attorney who presided over the hearing. We should have a response sometime in late November.

A union meeting was held in Macon on October 28th. In attendance were Wally, Dave, Richard and myself along with a significant number of the Macon membership. Wally gave an update on the A-76 process and an explanation of the pay including how we got to this point. Dave gave an update on the MEO team and their progress, while answering numerous questions from the members. Thanks to Larry Schultz for hosting this meeting.

MIA AIFSS: Miami management, in their infinite lack of wisdom and sound labor relations practices, decided that they did not have to negotiate the watch schedule or annual leave policy with the local union. They unilaterally issued significant changes to the current watch schedule and even developed four additional lines without any negotiation. After several discussions with the Region, they have stepped in and directed the Miami management to negotiate per the contract. For the record, since they did commit the violations, the local union has filed several grievances and ULPs surrounding this issue. It appears that the bi-monthly training that Miami management is receiving from the Region attempting to teach them how to be managers should also include some contract training along with some labor relations training.

SOUTHWEST REGION

WESTERN-PACIFIC REGION

Mike Stafford, Director and Mike Puffer, Coordinator

I sent this letter to [Ms.] Blakey on September 28. I am still waiting for a response to Human Resource questions. I would encourage everyone to send their concerns about lack of information to Congress and maybe we can get some answers. I let everyone know if I hear anything.

Ms. Marion Blakey, FAA Administrator
800 S.W. Independence Ave
Washington D.C., 20591

Dear Ms. Blakey:

I would like to thank you for listening to me at the AOPA convention in Palm Springs last October, when you stopped by the NAATS booth. I came away with the impression that you genuinely wanted to hear my input, and valued my opinions. I am an air traffic controller in the Flight Service option with over 10 years experience in the FAA and the Air Force.

I want to voice my concern over the way the Flight Service A-76 study is being conducted. I see and feel the adverse impact of the study on morale on a daily basis. I realize that the A-76 is going to occur; however we could make the process easier for the employees. There is a perception that the deadlines have been moved up for political reasons. Politicians should not doubt that a valid process would continue regardless of which political party is on control. An unintended result of the compressed deadlines is that accurate data is not being used to write the Performance Work Statement (PWS). I feel rushing this process will adversely affect safety, and lead to eventual cost overruns when the contract is awarded.

The lack of concrete, uniform information from FAA Headquarters on Human Resource issues, and employees� futures concern me. We are about a year away from the A76 decision and the employees have not been told if we will be: retained by the agency, moved to other options, offered an early retirement, or be given waivers when necessary for the age 31 limit. I ask you to put yourself in our place; is this how you would like to be treated? These questions should be answered as soon as possible. The lack of information is making employees question the effectiveness and the competence of those running the process.

When I read the A-76 circular I was lead to believe the process was for contracting out jobs already performed by the private sector, like janitorial services and lawn care services. In all of my research I have not found a single company that provides the exact service that we do. In fact, Flight Service controllers are the only people certified by the National Weather Service to provide pilot weather briefings. DUATS provides a similar service, but they do not provide the interpretation of the information. If the pilot has the information and doesn�t understand it, then it is useless -- and dangerous. The FAA could argue it assumes the liability every time a pilot contacts us. There is a positive benefit to the pilot calling us that can�t be measured in dollars: we have a pilot who knows everything required to make a safe flight and to operate safely within the National Airspace, and that makes the system safer.

How did we allow Flight Service to become this broken? We have 40-60% of our workforce eligible to retire, we have not been hiring to meet attrition, and our technology is obsolete. Part of the problem stems from a general lack of knowledge at all levels of the FAA about how the Flight Service option fits into, and functions as an integral part of the National Airspace System.

I think that if the FAA had asked the everyday employees how we would fix Flight Service, we would have come up with numerous ways to cut costs, improve capabilities, and improve job satisfaction. This method would have allowed employees to have ownership and pride in the process and outcome. Instead the FAA chose a path that has decreased job satisfaction and morale. The FAA has alienated employees by denying they are Air Traffic Controllers when dealing with media, and belittling their worth during contract negotiations. OASIS has incurred drastic budget cuts, delaying a much needed briefing tool that would have made us more efficient and modernized flight service, two of the FAA�s stated goals of the A-76 study.

I thank you for once again listening to my views. I look forward to hearing your response. I also invite you to come and visit San Diego AFSS, and to see how we make the National Airspace System a safer place to fly. If you would like to contact me directly my work phone is 858-277-0503, my home phone is 909-928-4842, or my email is [email protected].

Sincerely,
Michael J. Puffer
Air Traffic Controller
SAN AFSS

I see one glaring issue with A-76, lack of leadership in the management ranks. Facility managers don�t have the answers, because the information is not reaching them. Regional Folks don�t have answers and don�t seem to care. They seem to think that it won�t affect them... however, if there are no flight service stations left to support, then there won�t be a need for the folks that support them. ATMT has been quiet as to what they think about the A-76. You can�t tell me that there is not a group of managers somewhere who think this A-76 is a bad idea. I (naively) wish they would get some intestinal fortitude and go to Congress and let them know that this is a bad idea. Well that is all I have for this month. Keep the faith, and focus your energies towards positive outcomes. Before I go I want to leave you with a poem :

First They Came for the Jews

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

-- Pastor Martin Niem�ller

Now is the time to act, before it is too late for us.

SAN DIEGO AFSS NEWS

SAN AFSS Happenings

It has been a busy couple of months at SAN. In September Norine Neal retired, leaving us with 2 supervisors. Gary M. and Elizabeth V. checked out in the facility towards the end of September. A warm welcome goes out to Gary just in from SJT. Retirements are hitting us hard. In the last 6 months we have had 2 retire and it looks like we could have 3 more by the beginning of the year. But fear not, Bill Peacock said there would be no retirement "bubble" bursting in Flight Service. (Yeah right!!)

Congratulations & Welcome!

Congratulations is in order to Alex and Marta Cisneros, they wed on October 3, 2003. Marta welcome to the Flight Service family.

2004 Schedule

Our schedule for next year is already bid, and we are in the process of picking vacation.

HAWTHORNE AFSS NEWS

Eli Morrissy, HHR AFSS

New Carpet

The new carpeting has been installed on the operations floor. It looks so much better than the patchwork of squares of varying shades of gray and levels of wear and/or dirt left after the workstation installation.

Kudos to the AF engineer in charge and the company that came in to do the installation. The job was completed the job in just 2 nights. Further kudos to HHR AF Tech Mike who took the trouble to make sure the underlying plates sat level on their frames so we wouldn�t be tripping over the edges.

Controller Chairs

In addition to the new carpet, we now have new controller chairs out on the floor. The royal blue color goes nicely with the gray tweed in the carpet.

PAC System

Work is beginning on the new electronic access control system. The installation crew will be with us through Thanksgiving and into early December.

Donations for St. Margaret�s

Now that the holidays are upon us, our facility CFC focal, Ned Kramer (NK) has put out the red containers to collect donations of canned food, personal hygiene items, clothing and toys to go to help the folks at St. Margaret�s help others during the holidays.

Those toys and clothes your kids have outgrown can go on to another family who needs a little help making ends meet. Don�t just stop at the kids� closets, either. We�ve all got clothes and other items we no longer use just gathering dust in our homes. Here�s a great chance to free up much needed storage space while doing a good deed for someone else.

I know it�s been a tough year with the A-76 and other political matters, but it�s been a much harder year for a lot of other folks. Please be as generous as possible.

NAATS News Editorial Policy

Nothing that is inflammatory or scurrilous, libelous, attacks members by name or which contains words or phrases that are in poor taste and likely to be unnecessarily offensive, should be printed in the NAATS News or Regional Supplements. Individual(s) views expressed in the newsletter do not necessarily reflect the position of the Union.