Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

My name is Walter W. ("Wally") Pike. I am completing my fifth year as President of the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists (NAATS). I have worked for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for thirty-four years, and in air traffic control continuously since 1973, with assignments at Fort Worth, Childress, and San Antonio, Texas, and at Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

At the same time, I have been a NAATS union official since 1979, serving in various capacities.

NAATS is the exclusive representative of the more than 2,200 controllers and automation specialists who work at the Flight Service Stations (FSS) throughout the United States, and I am here today to give you their views. I want to note that these dedicated men and women have continued to provide vital safety functions to the flying public during our times of national crises, including the 1981 strike and 9/11/01.

My testimony will focus on our recommendations for the FAA's reauthorization. I respectfully request that my entire written statement be made part of the record.

US DOT Inspector General Kenneth Mead has stated that there are four central areas that need to be considered in FAA�s reauthorization: (1) making FAA a performance-based organization by controlling the costs of its operations and cost growth in major acquisitions; (2) building aviation system capacity and more efficient use of airspace to prevent a repeat of the summer of 2000; (3) striking a balance on how airport funds will be used for aviation system capacity, airport safety, and security; (4) aviation safety as FAA�s top priority. I want to take this opportunity to address each area from the perspective of FAA�s FSS air traffic controllers.

Controlling the costs of FAA operations can best be accomplished by more effective utilization of its most valuable resource, its employees. FSS controllers currently provide many critical and essential duties for the aviation public but they are capable and willing to perform many more. In fact this group of professionals represents the largest untapped and underutilized resource within the FAA.

The air traffic controllers Mr. Mead speaks about are not the FSS controllers. Quite the contrary, FSS controllers have been attempting to negotiate a contract with the FAA since August 1997. As Mr. Mead notes, FAA personnel reform resulted in agency negotiations with its unions on pay. Our dispute with the FAA now centers on compensation and has resulted in an impasse. Unfortunately the only provision contained in the legislation for finally resolving a pay impasse is to bring the matter back to Congress. Understandably, Congress does not want to use its time resolving pay disputes between the FAA and its unions. Also, understandably, the parties need some forum to lend finality to an endless series of disputes. Mr. Chairman, we ask for your consideration in legislation allowing the use of the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP) to resolve these disputes and to allow Congress to attend to those grave matters now facing our nation. NAATS would be happy to accept a ruling of a truly neutral third party such as the FSIP.

A success story in FAA major acquisitions is the Operational and Supportability Implementation System (OASIS). This long awaited FSS modernization equipment is the result of FAA management and NAATS collaborating through the Human Factors Team. The OASIS system is in latter stages of development and early stages of deployment to replace the antiquated and increasingly more unsupportable M1FC system in the automated flight service stations (AFSS). Development on OASIS continues so that the system is able to meet the changing needs of the controllers in such areas as security and increased responsibilities for dissemination of security and international data to pilots. OASIS has had a history of responding to the challenge of working with significant budget cuts, but that is becoming increasingly more difficult to support as more systems are deployed to the field. Budget cutting has delayed the completion of deployment of OASIS by more than two years so
far, and any further cuts will see that pushed further out. With the latest budget cut and the inability to get the money restored in future budgets the OASIS system will not complete deployment until 2006. Another reduction in budget will see that end date slip to 2007.

OASIS is a leased service rather than purchased equipment. The lease term extends until 2010. As it is the FAA will have fully deployed use of the system for only four years before it has to negotiate a new contract. Further reductions in funding will see that drop to three years. The OASIS program should be commended for continuing to move forward under budget cuts that have been as high as 60 percent. OASIS is a critical system to the safety and security of the pilots that use Flight Service thus making it an essential part of the safety and security of the National Airspace System (NAS) and our nation. Mr. Chairman, we strongly urge OASIS be fully funded and deployed

More efficient use of the airspace also relates to a better definition and delegation of air traffic controller (ATC) duties. There are functions currently assigned to some FAA employees that are not part of their primary job responsibility and could be efficiently and willingly performed by FSS controllers. This would allow the first group to focus both their energies and time on their primary responsibilities while allowing FSS controllers the opportunity to provide ever more essential services to the aviation public. The net effect would benefit the entire national airspace system (NAS).

Two examples of some of these duties are:

1. Identification of relative aircraft positioning and severe weather hazards,

2. Monitoring military special use airspace.

These items can be accomplished through the use of equipment called Special Use Airspace/Inflight Situational Enhancement (SUA/ISE). Identification of relative aircraft positioning and severe weather hazards would allow FSS controllers to provide information to airborne pilots thus helping them to avoid flight into adverse weather. Monitoring military special use airspace and providing information to airborne pilots on "hot" areas is particularly important to the technology concept called "Free Flight". Essentially Free Flight allows much more latitude to pilots to determine their own routings but, obviously, it�s extremely important to them that they know where the military is flying, times and altitudes. These are value added advisory services, primarily for the more than 347,000 general aviation pilots but would be available to any pilot, upon request. As I mentioned, the above can be accomplished through the use of SUA/ISE but this equipments needs to be deployed and certified for use by the FSS controllers.

Another area of improved service to the flying public is truly interactive weather briefings; meaning pilots and FSS controllers view the same graphics during briefings thereby enhancing this critical service. Thus far technology and cost have prohibited these simultaneous active interaction types of briefings. Nevertheless, there are opportunities. Video graphics can be "slaved" from FSS briefing workstations directly to fixed base operators (FBO). Using dedicated phone lines the FSS controller providing the briefing and the pilot receiving it would be able to engage in a more meaningful dialogue while seeing the same picture. Simple technology can also provide the briefer with a "white pencil" to highlight areas of high interest. The security and control would remain within the FAA flight service stations while the pilots would benefit from the personal interaction.

NAATS has initiated innovative discussions with senior FAA management to further identify and study these duties. The outcome of these meetings is far from certain, however. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that you and your Subcommittee continue to provide oversight on this process and ensure these and other efficiencies are realized through reauthorization.

Airport safety and security, contained in area four of Mr. Mead�s statement are part of the larger picture of national safety and security. By the FAA�s own accounts FSS controllers are essential to the safe and expeditious flow of air traffic. The FAA has gone on to say that the branches of air traffic; terminal, enroute and flight service are all interrelated and interdependent. Further, the FAA has acknowledged that the air traffic control response to the tragedy of September 11 would not have been possible without the considerable contributions of FSS controllers.

Despite this, Mr. Chairman, I regret to report to you and the Subcommittee that the FAA is still conducting the ill-considered and ill-advised A76 contracting out study on this workforce. If this process proceeds unabated it will result in mandating that the lowest bidder will provide the critical and essential FSS function in the future. At the conclusion of the A76 process the FAA will not be required to seek and, indeed, has no intention of soliciting, congressional oversight or approval. Once the bids go out it will be too late to stop the process.

We understand and agree with the desirability of conducting A76 studies for those functions that can be better performed by private industry. OMB Circular A76, however, makes a distinction between those duties that are core to the agency mission from those that are support to this mission. FSS controllers provide pilot weather briefings to pilots both in the air and on the ground ensuring that flights are safely completed. Enroute Flight Advisory Service provides "real time" weather briefings to airborne pilots, advising them of the latest breaking and most recent weather available. Additionally FSS controllers coordinate search and rescue for overdue pilots and aircraft orientation for pilots lost during their flights. We coordinate with both the Customs and the Drug Enforcement Agencies; I know that both you and your Committee understand the significance of these duties in today�s world.

I also want to emphasize that FSS controllers are responsible for providing the temporary flight restriction (TFR) information to pilots so that they do not stray into prohibited, restricted or special use airspace. Recent examples of these are the restrictions during the President�s State of the Union Address, the unfortunate tragedy of the space shuttle debris and the Air Defense Identification Zone restrictions, implemented here in our nation�s capital and planned for other areas across the US. When President Bush travels by air his location is frequently identified in advance using TFR�s. It�s hard to imagine a more inherently governmental operation relating to national security. Without doubt the duties performed by FSS controllers are central to the core mission of the FAA.

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate your interest and the interest of the members of this Subcommittee in this matter. We are very concerned, however, that this A76 process will soon have so much momentum that it will be beyond even the control of this Subcommittee. Once these loyal and dedicated employees are replaced it will be too late to bring them back and undo the damage. We urge you to intervene before it is too late.

In conclusion, we ask for your continued consideration in these areas of transforming the FAA into a more performance-based organization with increased service to the flying public while also enhancing homeland security and aviation safety.

I would be pleased to respond to any questions. Thank you.