NGATS Institute Public Meeting
Renaissance Washington DC Hotel
999 Ninth Street NW
Washington D.C.
March 28th, 2006
2:00-4:00 pm

Welcome and Introduction
            Steve Fisher, Director of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NGATS) Institute, welcomed everyone to the first NGATS Institute Public Meeting. As an introduction, Fisher played a video on the NGATS Vision featuring Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta. Mineta described the goal of NGATS as creating a system to handle the ever-changing and ever-growing world of air transportation. The video covered the future of NGATS from safety and satellites to unmanned vehicles and weather considerations.

JPDO Overview
            Bob Pearce, Acting Director of the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO), began by stating that the NGATS Institute is essential in following legislation to include private industry in the NGATS process. The JPDO consolidates the efforts of six federal agencies [Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), National Aviation Space Administration (NASA), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Commerce (DOC), and the White House Office of Science and Technology] to plan for the projected changes in growth and nature of demand for the ATS. The NGATS Integrated Plan was developed in December 2004 and the most recent Progress Report was delivered in early 2006. Pearce stated that “we don’t just design and flip a switch”-the NGATS requires constant maintenance, and a significant part of that maintenance is relegated to the eight Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) detailed in the Integrated Plan. The eight IPTs are given leadership and held accountable for developments in their eight respective fields: Agile ATS, Airport Infrastructure, Safety, Security, Shared Situational Awareness, Global Harmonization, Weather, and Environment. The NGATS Institute also plays a large role in the planning of the next generation of air transportation by establishing the presence of private sector on the eight IPTs and accepting tasks and studies from the JPDO, including a current look at cost analysis.
           
JPDO Status and Goals
Pearce then discussed the key capabilities of the “curb-to-curb” service goal of NGATS, like Network Enabled Operations (NEO), performance based systems, board area precision navigation, aircraft trajectory-based operations, equivalent visual operations, super density operations, and the assimilation of weather into decisions. Concept of operations and systems architecture, Institute research projects, and demonstration projects are just some examples of what lies ahead.  Pearce closed by saying, “we absolutely need private sector involvement in this. We need the Institute.”

NGATS Institute
            Fisher opened by stating that Vision 100, the act that created the JPDO, also mandated a joint government-private sector partnership in the development of NGATS. The NGATS Institute enables this partnership by undergoing a rigorous process of soliciting for participation on the Institute website via Needs Statements developed by each of the eight IPT Directors and their staff, accepting and filing applications, holding a review session during which select applicants are chosen, and in-processing all the accepted applicants and sending letters out to each applicant in regards to the results. Fisher said that the focus is on individual-not corporate- participant expertise. In addition to private sector pro bono participation on the IPTs, the JPDO defines the need for more than individual participation via tasks given to the Institute which will then be posted on the Institute website. Funded task awards are expected in spring 2006.
            The Institute Management Council (IMC) Board oversees the NGATS Institute. Currently, there are 14 major civil aviation associations represented on the Board.
            In addition to the upcoming task requests, the Institute is investigating other ways to further the partnership between the government and private industry, including expanding the website to include a web portal to facilitate more knowledge sharing.

Question & Answer Period

Moderator: Steve Fisher, NGATS Institute Director     
Panelists: Doug Arbuckle-Agile ATS IPT Director, Karl Grundmann-Communications, Deb McElroy-Regional Airline Association (RAA) President & IMC Board Member, John Douglass-Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) President & IMC Board Executive Committee Member, Bob Pearce-Acting JPDO Director, Duane Woerth-Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) President & IMC Board Co-Chair, Peggy Gervasi-Acting JPDO Deputy Director
           
Question #1: Bob Dunn of FASTER inquired about small aircraft/taxi representation on the IPTs and how thus far he has found it difficult

Answer #1: Fisher responded that he should go to the NGATS Institute website or call him directly for a personal announcement when the IPTs in which he is interested may be open for solicitation. Doug Arbuckle of the Agile ATS IPT said that, for his IPT and therefore possibly the case for others, a next round of solicitations is not needed until gaps are identified. IMC Co-Chair Duane Woerth shared that the IMC works toward a consensus for all areas of expertise, including small aircraft and air taxi, because if an agreement can not be reached, everyone is undermined.

Question #2: Cas Castleberry of Air Traffic Control Association and the IMC Board asked about the global harmonization aspect of NGATS and how the international process or development of a common system was proceeding

Answer #2: Pearce stated that the overall idea is broken down into regions around the world which the JPDO is trying to organize while at the same time respecting what each region has accomplished, like SESAR. There are coordinating committees in China and Japan. Pearce said prioritization is key-there is “a lot of world, a little bit of JPDO.” John Douglass of the IMC Executive Committee agreed that there is anxiety on both sides of the Atlantic about who is ahead of whom, while both sides understand that there needs to be interoperability. JPDO Communications Division head Karl Grundmann felt that presence at Maastricht made a positive statement: “we are here to stay and we need to do this together.”

Question #3: Ron Swanda of General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) asked the panelists what they viewed as the most important or significant challenges.

Answer #3: Woerth felt that it was identifying costs and priorities and having Congress commit. Pearce said that getting new programs started and identifying the exact future plan would be the most challenging. Douglass thought keeping a good perspective is the most important because the NGATS process will span several administrations where different parties will be in control, and we have to remember where we came from because “it’s not are we or aren’t we, but how we are going to do this.” Deb McElroy of RAA and the IMC Board agreed that we must keep focused and committed because “failure is not an option-we must transition, modernize, and keep our credibility.” Grundmann stated that it was very important to get the message out beyond the air transportation world and into the minds of the American public because they need to know how this is going to help them. Peggy Gervasi, Acting Deputy Director of the JPDO, said the need for a robust cost and benefit analysis that includes community in addition to government was crucial. Arbuckle identified proving what the incentive is for approving transformation as the most significant challenge.

Question #4: Ron Davis of Booz Allen asked about the planning versus implementation process.

Answer #4: Pearce said that an architecture council overarching all agencies is in use that should identify (in)consistencies and impact. He went on to say that the JPDO may not have direct authority over action, but we can provide analysis objectively. Arbuckle added that this question hasn’t been asked as much as one may think. People see where they want to be and then consider the path to get there. Some things aren’t on the path, but may be cost/benefit effective anyway.

Question #5: Pete Bunce of GAMA and the IMC Board inquired about NASA funding and if, looking at the current budget, would there be enough money to support the JPDO.

Answer #5: Douglass said we are very concerned about it and relentless in “holding the administration’s feet in the fire” because the government has to take on the program since there simply isn’t enough private dollars to fund it. He hopes the budget will go up after this administration. Arbuckle said NASA’s research proposals are being evaluated to make sure they align with the JPDO’s needs. Pearce stated that NASA’s low budget reflects overall lack of enthusiasm for air transportation.

Question #6: A representative of L3 Communications wanted elaboration on the modeling already done on concept of operations.

Answer #6: In addition to what he presented during the JPDO Overview, Pearce mentioned that Sherry Borener, the head of the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis Division, deployed a suite of models, not just one, including visability and precision operations.

Steve Fisher thanked everyone for participating in or attending the NGATS Institute Public Meeting.