NASOPs_March_2018_Minutes_Final

Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee (REDAC) 

National Airspace System (NAS) Operations Subcommittee | MINUTES

Date: March 27-28, 2018

Location: Washington DC (Conference Room varies by d a t e )

Purpose: Review of FY19-20 Proposed Portfolio; Provide Guidance and

Recommendations; Program Deep Dives

Facilitator: Francisco Bermudez, Designated Federal Officer (DFO)

Chairperson: Leo Prusak

Note Takers: Sadaf Alam

Joe Ivkovic

Upcoming Meetings:

 April 11, 2018, Washington, DC (Full REDAC)

Day 1 – March 27 12, 2017 (Tuskegee Conference Room 430E)

Review of REDAC Recommendations, Responses, and Open Actions

Presenters Leo Prusak/Francisco Bermudez

Summary: Mr. Prusak, NAS Ops Subcommittee Chairperson, opened the meeting 

with a review of Prior Action Items, Current Action Items, and Findings and 

Recommendations (F&Rs) status. The subcommittee noted that the development of the 

Commercial Space industry was accelerating and that the aim was for the FAA to 

further accelerate Commercial Space projects to better prepare for Commercial Space 

Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS). The Subcommittee would like to 

have another Pathfinder briefing at the Fall 2018 NAS Ops Subcommittee meeting. The 

Subcommittee agreed that the 2015 open action items be closed. Shelly Yak, FAA 

Research and Development Executive Director, described the progress of the National 

Aviation Research Plan (NARP) Redesign. She stated that, in her estimate, the 

redesign was about 80% complete, and was optimistic about the new NARP. Shelly 

also spoke about the FY19 budget, and said, in view of the current budget, the FAA will 

need to realign its priorities. The Appropriators in The House of Representatives have 

been budget-briefed. Ms. Yak noted that the FY18 budget has been signed and 

released, with substantial increases to various programs. John Hansman, REDAC 

Chair, thinks that the NAS Ops Subcommittee was the perfect platform to objectively 

say how the FY19 budget cuts would impact programs, and how the FAA should reallocate funds, if needed.

Presentation Budget Briefing

Presenter Mike Gallivan

Summary: Mr. Gallivan, R,E&D Financial Manager, reported the FAA RE&D FY18 

President’s Budget Request was for $150M. This request has been signed with an 

additional $38M allocated to the RE&D budget. While most programs received an 

increase, some programs did see a decrease in funding. Mike Gallivan pointed out that 

UAS had an addition $17M and the new total for RE&D E&E is now $28M. Mr. Gallivan 

stated that the FAA has requested $74M for FY19. He pointed out that this number is 

lower than the FY18 number; as a result, in FY19, Continuing Resolutions (CR) will not be 
issued using FY18 numbers, instead the FAA will CR utilizing FY19 budget to avoid 

overspending. Mr. Gallivan pointed out that the FY20 RE&D budget request will also be 

$74M. FAA Reauthorization is extended until September 30, 2018.

Presentation 1A10D NextGen – New Air Traffic Management Requirements

Presenter Arthur Orton

Summary: Mr. Orton provided a presentation on the New Air Traffic Management 

(ATM) Requirements. This presentation focused on the benefits, research goals, 

accomplishments, and plans of the New ATM Requirements. The New ATM 

Requirements program was needed to identify new opportunities to improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of air traffic management operations. Mr. Orton pointed out 

that the ultimate goal of NEW ATM Requirements was to increase the number of 

arrivals and departures at major airports in the NAS. As requested at the Fall 2017 

meeting, the Subcommittee was provided with updated out year financial data. Mr. 

Orton indicated that they have received a flat budget of $7.5M, down from the FY18 

budget of $9M. Dr. Hansman inquired about any Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) 

operations that were covered by New ATM Requirements. New ATM Requirements do 

not have any funds allocated towards VTOL operations/research. The Subcommittee 

questioned the New ATM timeline and thought these activities should be happening 

sooner. Steve Bradford stressed that shifting work forward was a complex process that 

involved multiple stakeholders. The FAA is attempting to build a new standard and 

bring the rest of industry along with it. He added that, that takes time.

Presentation Deep Dive UAS Topics

Presenter Steve Bradford

Summary of Briefing: Mr. Bradford began the briefing by giving an overview of the 

current Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) environment. He continued to discuss the 

FAA’s role in the emerging UAS environment and pointed out that the FAA has two 

Research Transition Teams (RTTs). The reason for this is that there is still ongoing 

cooperation between the FAA and NASA. Mr. Bradford stated that both the FAA and 

NASA have concerns that there is not a harmonized agreement on integrating UAS into 

the NAS. Dr. Hansman asked for clarification on what a “big” or “small” UAS was. Mr.

Bradford explained that the differentiation comes by which rules the UAS operates 

under. For instance, a “big” UAS is operating in controlled airspace whereas a “small” 

UAS operates in an uncontrolled environment. Dr. Hansman wanted to know how Low 

Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC) was playing a role in the 

FAA’s UAS work. Mr. Bradford communicated that LAANC is an application within the 

UAS Traffic Management (UTM) environment. Mr. Bradford explained that, in Visual 

Line of Sight (VLOS) Part 107 Operations, an operator can freely use Class G Airspace 

utilizing LAANC. Facility maps in LAANC allow UAS operations within 5 miles of Class 

B Airspace. Mr. Bradford thinks this is an achievement that should not be

underestimated.
2

Presentation Deep Dive Time Based Operations (TBO)

Presenter John Maffei

Summary of Briefing: John Maffei started with a brief overview of Trajectory Based 

Operations (TBO) and displayed a road map detailing the parts of TBO. Mr. Zellweger 

questioned if Performance Based Navigation (PBN) noise issues have played into 

Four-Dimensional Trajectory Based Operations (4DT). Mr. Maffei confirmed that it 

does play into TBO, and that the Metroplex program is working on addressing these 

concerns. The Subcommittee questioned the greatest risk impacting the TBO program. 

According to Mr. Maffei, the greatest risk impacting TBO is the change management 

process. He believes that if other parties do not exchange data the FAA has no other 

way to receive the data.

John Maffei noted that work is done with MITRE to obtain data (such as out times from 

aircraft) and transmit them real time via phone, tablet, or other means. This could be a 

low-cost solution to a complex issue. Dr. Hansman expressed concern as to how Air

Traffic Controllers’ will handle the new procedures and questioned if they will be quick 

to revert to the old procedures. Mr. Maffei replied that this wouldn’t be a function of Air 

Traffic Control, but rather a function of airport operations. 

Presentation 1A01C Operations Concept Validation & Infrastructure (ATDP)

Presenter Brian Duvall

Summary: Mr. Duvall began with a brief overview of ATDP and the reason for the 

program’s necessity. In short, ATDP investigates specific concept elements and drives 

operational and technical requirements and implications for human factors, training, and 

procedures. Dr. Hansman wanted greater detail into the process that determined which 

Concept of Operations goes forward. Mr. Duvall responded by saying they have 

embraced a new process for AJV-7, a board will determine if the concept will be 

pursued. The Subcommittee expressed general confusion as to what the ATDP 

program does.

Maureen Molz, R&D Management Division Manager, explained that, historically, AJV7 would assess and analyze various gaps from an operational perspective. Dr. 

Hansman requesteda list of concepts that AJV-7 is currently working; the program 

agreed to send that list over to the REDAC Subcommittee members as well as a 

funding overview. The Subcommittee requested what the TBO gap analysis was. 

AJV-7 agreed to provide that information. The Subcommittee asked that this 

presentation be revised for the Fall 2018 REDAC Subcommittee meeting to better 

explain their work, what concepts are worked on, and to provide a funding overview. 

The program has accepted the action.
3

Presentation A11.N Commercial Space Transportation (AST) RE&D Program

Presenter Paul Wilde

Summary: Mr. Wilde began with an overview of the AST mission and structure. AST’s 

mission is to ensure the protection of the public, property, national security, and foreign 

policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry, and to 

encourage, facilitate, and promote United States commercial space transportation. Dr. 

Hansman questioned if AST had a wavier for sonic booms, as there was a 

congressionally-mandated restriction to under Mach 1 operations. Mr. Wilde said that 

these operations were not restricted and do not require a waiver as the sonic boom will 

not necessarily happen over land; moreover, Subcommittee members seemed unsure if 

this mandate would even apply to commercial space aircraft as they may not be 

deemed “aircraft” in the conventional sense. Mr. Zellweger questioned if the RE&D 

goals were necessary, given the constrained budget. Mr. Wilde acknowledged the 

subcommittee’s concern regarding the FY19 budget and communicated that the 

Commercial Space Office has a statutory limit on what activities the program can fund. 

According to Leo Prusak, there is a fundamental disconnect with commercial space 

operations in the NAS. Mr. Prusak suggested that instead of integration, there was a

definite airspace segregation occurring. Mr. Prusak continued by saying that if 

commercial space truly wanted to happen, there was a need for research within TBFM 

operations that show what will happen if a rocket misses its launch and what will its 

impact be on the NAS. Dr. Hansman reiterated this point and added that there must be 

a policy answer to this question with sound research to reinforce the policy. Mr. Wilde 

continued with the briefing to discuss Spaceport planning. Dr. Hansman thinks that 

Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds should cover Spaceport research, planning, 

and operations.
4

Presentation Center of Excellence Briefing (COE)

Presenter Patricia Watts

Summary: Ms. Watts began her briefing by stating the COEs mission, which

is to enhance access to university research capabilities and products by 

awarding single- and multi-year research grants and contracts to colleges, 

universities, and affiliate organizations in multidisciplinary

Aviation/aerospace related disciplines. The COE seeks to promote the growth

of a scientifically and technologically trained United States workforce. The 

COE has between 90-100 Grant Programs. Then Ms. Watts walked the 

Subcommittee through the COE evaluation and selection process, displayed 

the geographic distribution of the COE core teams and noted that the wide 

geographic distribution was by design as it helps promote scientific 

development in a variety of communities across the United States. Overall, 

the Subcommittee shared a general appreciation for the program and was

very enthusiastic about its past performance and future outlook.

Presentation A11.K Aviation Weather Research Program (AWRP)

Presenter Randy Bass

Summary: At first, Mr. Bass briefed on the funding of the AWRP program. He 

indicated that the funding level for FY19 and beyond will be lower. The 

Subcommittee inquired how these cuts will impact the program. Mr. Bass 

explained that AWRP will largely defund all weather-related items that are 

not required (i.e., needed for rule making). The Subcommittee agreed with 

the decision. Mr. Bass briefly went over the benefits and successes of the 

AWRP program before transitioning into the FY20 activities. The FY20

activities include Convective Weather, Turbulence, Ceiling and Visibility, 

Quality Assessment, and Icing. Mr. Bass provided a breakdown of funds 

allocated for each activity. Bruce Holmes inquired about the number of fatal

accidents due to icing, and Mr. Bass indicated that number was near 0 for 

commercial aviation. Mr. Holmes asked Mr. Bass to narrate the benefits of 

AWRP in the context of TBO. Mr. Bass said that TBO was where AWRP was

moving towards. AWRP has convective weather and turbulence forecasts 

that have worked well in the past but may not work in a TBO environment.

Mr. Bass informed the subcommittee that AWRP initiated collaboration with TBO 

stakeholders to address any TBO weather needs. Dr. Hansman expressed concern that 

In-Flight Icing was a lower priority (due to the decreased budget) and recommended 

that the program reduce efforts on Ceiling & Visibility Research to prioritize In-flight 

Icing. Mr. Bass communicated to the Subcommittee that inflight icing was not a big 

issue to
5

industry; as icing related incidents were not very prevalent in Commercial 

Aviation Operations. Dr. Hansman disagreed. Mr. Bass pointed out that

AWRP would like to keep the inflight icing portion, but due to budget

shortfalls, it did not seem like it was an option at this point. Mr. Kuchar asked if the 

program was leveraging data (e.g. icing reports) from AJM. Mr. Bass confirmed the 

use of data was from A J M .

Presentation A12.e NextGen – Weather Technology in the Cockpit (WTIC)

Presenter Gary Pokodner

Summary: Mr. Pokodner began the briefing by identifying the purpose of the 

WTIC program, which was to identify casual factors in weather-related General 

Aviation (GA) safety risks/hazards, identify casual factors for Part 121 and 

135 adverse weather risks/hazards, and to recommend minimum weather 

services to resolve/reduce identified risks. Then, Mr. Pokodner discussed the 

out-year budget numbers, indicated that his program will receive a large cut 

in FY19 and onward. He then gave a detailed overview of the WTIC program 

outlook in FY20.Due to the reduced budget, the WTIC program was narrowing 

its scope of work and will focus on completing all ongoing projects that can be 

worked in smaller phases. Mr. Pokodner stated that the WTIC program will 

have a reduced ability for outreach and transition of research and will have to 

delay the start of new projects to resolve gaps that have not been yet 

addressed. The subcommittee was curious as to how the WTIC program was

quantifying priority risks. Mr. Pokodner said that it was very difficult to

quantify the impact for General Aviation (GA) risks as GA tends to not provide 

as much feedback as commercial aviation.

Presentation Subcommittee Discussion

Presenter Leo Prusak

Discussion – The subcommittee chairperson, Mr. Prusak decided that, in

lieu of time, the NASOPS REDAC will be postponing the subcommittee 

discussion to the following morning on Day 2 of NASOPS REDAC Meeting.

Presentation UBER Elevate

Presenter Tom Prevot

Summary: Mr. Prevot began his presentation by describing the increase in

traffic congestion in major metropolitan cities. With an increasing population, 

most top cities over the world have a population of more than 250 million.

Uber has tried to lessen this congestion by utilizing cars better by introducing 

ride sharing with pool and express services. More than 20% of Uber trips are 

pool, and during peak hours more than 50% are pool trips. Uber is currently 

available in 77 countries, 600+ cities, and has about 65 million monthly riders 

and over 10 Million daily trips. To further reduce congestion, Uber Elevate is 

looking into an urban air transportation. Uber Elevate is exploring the barriers 

they’ll need to overcome to make vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) vehicles 

a reality, bringing uberAIR to Dallas and Los Angeles by 2020. Their intention is 

to design a 5-person vehicle (including the pilot) that will be
6

quieter than helicopters (15 decibels lesser). Mr. Prevot cited a few barriers 

such as airspace integration, vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), user

acceptance, safe batteries, and retrofitting the rooftops to name a few. Dr. 

Hansman questioned if there was an option of using the hybrid electric model 

for these vehicles and using short takeoff and landing instead of the VTOL.

At the moment, Uber Elevate is very optimistic with their current plan and 

working very closely with organizations like Embraer, Aurora, and others, to 

develop an affordable, efficient, and cost-effective solution to urban air 

transportation. The subcommittee members expressed concerns on the 

operational feasibility of Uber Air in the NAS.

Day 2 – March 28th, 2018 (The District Conference Rom)

Presentation Review Findings and Recommendations/ New Actions

Presenter Leo Prusak

Discussion – The Chairperson, Leo Prusak, opened the second day of the 

NAS Ops REDAC Subcommittee by welcoming all Subcommittee members 

and opening the discussion with the new RE&D budget. At the next NAS Ops 

REDAC Subcommittee, Mr. Kuchar would like to have a breakdown of each 

activity in New ATM Requirements. The Subcommittee agreed that there

seemed to be a lot of activities within New ATM Requirements with a small 

budget. Mr. Holmes inquired about how the Facilities and Equipment (F&E)

was impacted. Ms. Molz stated that the F&E budget was not affected like the 

RE&D budget was. Ms. Molz encouraged the Subcommittee to look at the 

Department of Transportation’s Strategic Goals, these were often the driving

force behind many FAA activities. The Subcommittee moved on to discuss 

Spaceport development and their concerns of integrating Commercial Space

into the NAS. The Subcommittee might issue an F&R regarding Integration of 

Spaceports into the NAS.

Presentation Future Issues and Opportunities Reassessment

Presenter Leo Prusak

Discussion – Mr. Holmes took this opportunity to recommend to the 

subcommittee that they have IBM come to brief the Fall 2018 REDAC NAS 

Ops Subcommittee. Mr. Holmes thought it would be very beneficial to have 

IBM discuss the latest 5G capabilities and the future involvement of 5G/other 

emerging communications technologies in the NAS. The Subcommittee agreed

and expressed interest in hearing what IBM has to say. Mr. Holmes agreed to 

reach out to IBM and see if they were willing to send a representative for the 

Fall 2018 session. Mr. Prusak, suggested that the subcommittee should 

consider issuing an F&R on TBO. He also suggested that the subcommittee 

consider issuing an F&R on airspace integration vs. segregation for 

Commercial Space Operations.
7

Presentation 1A01A Runway Incursion Reduction (RIRP) Update

Presenter Gregory Pray

Summary: Mr. Gregory Pray (presented instead of Ms. DeRosa) began the briefing by 

giving a breakdown of existing technology investments that have the potential to cover 

50 major airports. The Subcommittee questioned what ASSC was. Ms. DeRosa 

explained that it was a very similar system to ASDE-X that was being used at San 

Francisco (SFO).

Mr. Kuchar questioned why there was a spike in Runway Incursions in 2007. Mr. Kuchar 

believed this was due to improved reporting techniques. The Subcommittee agreed that 

the most reasonable explanation for the spike after 2007 must be due to better reporting 

techniques. Mr. Zellweger thought that the program should tackle the communication 

issue, as it looked like surveillance only decreased incursions by about 30%. Ms.

DeRosa will take Mr. Zellweger’s observation into consideration but pointed out that 

while data communication was the largest factor in Runway Incursions, and that 

surveillance greatly decreased the severity of the incursion. Mr. Prusak questioned why 

another market survey was conducted again if one was done in 2012. Ms. DeRosa 

pointed out that six years was a long time in terms of technology, and that a lot has 

evolved since 2012. Mr. Prusak agreed but expressed concerned that the program was

conducting too many market surveys. Mr. Kuchar suggested that the issue was not 

doing market surveys, but whether there was a qualitative cut to tackle the problem. Ms. 

DeRosa agreed, but said it was difficult to determine what the qualitative cut should be 

as there was a variety of factors making an evaluation difficult such as, loss of life, 

overall risk of incursion, and others.

Presentation 1A07A0 NextGen ATC/TechOps Human Factors

Presenter Sabreena Azam

Summary: Ms. Azam began her briefing by giving the historical overview of 

the INDP Human Factors program and how it was transitioning into a new 

program “Enterprise Human Factors Development”. Ms. Azam indicated that

this was to give the Human Factors program a higher-level approach in the 

hopes of getting more programs to leverage Human Factors 

recommendations. Mr. Zellweger asked if the program has seen any initial 

success with the change. Ms. Azam believed so, some programs such as 

Commercial Space have been eager to join, but other programs have not. Mr. 

Kuchar believes that a budget of $1.5M might not be enough to cover all of 

the programs activities; he would like to see a prioritization of how the 

program allocates money.
8

Presentation A11 Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human F a c t o r s

Presenter Dan Herschler

Summary: Mr. Herschler began his briefing by informing the subcommittee 

members that this was the same briefing presented at the Human Factors 

Subcommittee. Mr. Herschler reported that due to carryover funds, FY19 will 

give them an addition of $500K. Subcommittee member, James Kuchar, 

mentioned that he was surprised to see no requirements from Systems

Operations. Mr. Herschler confirmed that the Tech Ops HF team has not 

received any requirements from Systems Operations and showed no interest

despite his reaching out to them. The subcommittee inquired about the 

standards for the requirements, to which Mr. Herschler clarified that the FAA 

has internal standards that they utilize, and the requirements stem from 

t h o s e standards. The FAA does not send those standards outside the 

Agency, until they are published.
9

Presentation FY19 President’s Budget Submission Implications

Presenter Leo Prusak

Discussion – The subcommittee members discussed the strategic roadmap 

for the FAA and if the President’s new budget will have any consequences on 

it. The members also debated the implications on the FAA programs that

causes a risk by the diminishing b u d g e t s .

Presentation Subcommittee Discussion Recap & Closing

Presenter Leo Prusak

Discussion – Mr. Prusak concluded the meeting by summarizing the actions 

for the subcommittee members for writing finding and recommendations the 

briefing topics discussed earlier. He mentioned that Mr. Kuchar will provide a 

finding and recommendation brief on Human Factors (HF) priorities and the 

gaps in the HF research. Mr. Bertapelle and Ms. Seltzer were assigned to 

write a recommendation on Commercial Space. Mr. Holmes will organize an 

invite for a speaker from IBM, and Mr. Prusak will evaluate if the ATDP topic 

required an action or a finding, and a recommendation.
10

CLOSED ACTION ITEMS

August 2015 NAS Ops Meeting

Action Assigned Status

Inspect the FAA process to move weather concepts from 

requirements to implementation. Determine if the required 

elements are in place and if there are disconnects. Consider 

logistic and level of participation of members on the 

Requirements Management Board. Provide recommendations 

to the subcommittee

M. Weber

J. Kuchar Closed 

3/27/18

August 2016 NAS Ops Meeting

Action Assigned Status

Provide the subcommittee a copy of the UAS research plan (when 

available)

Ann 

Cihon

Closed 

4/11/18

March 2017 NAS Ops Meeting

Action Assigned Status

Set up a telecom to brief SMDP results to 

subcommittee

M. Molz Closed

1. Provide subcommittee feedback to S. Yak on 

NARP D. Zellwegger

Closed 

9/12/17

2a. UAS in the NAS & UTM/DAC interaction 

with RTTs (S. Bradford/J.Cavolowsky) S. Bradford Closed 3/27/18

2b. Pathfinder Program 

Updates/Organizational Mapping (S. 

Bradford)

S. Bradford Closed 

3/27/2018

2c. UAS Weather Products (S. Abelman) (30 

minutes) M. Molz Closed 9/12/2017

3. RIRP Update – Progress of RIRP benefits 

analysis (B. Marple) M. Molz Closed 9/12/2017
11

September 2017 NAS Ops Meeting

Action Assigned Status

1. RIRP will provide a briefing to the 

subcommittee on:

• Detailed risk reduction analysis work

• A determination of which technology 

investments could meet the 

operational need

Ben 

Marple/James 

Fee

Closed 

3/28/18

2. Commercial Space Integration will 

provide a concept of operations briefing 

highlighting the following:

• Budget allocations

• Detail funding that exists to 

conduct research to support the 

predicted space launches without 

significant impact to the NAS

Paul Wilde

Closed 

3/28/18

3. New ATM Requirements will provide 

detailed briefing on the following, at the 

Spring REDAC

• Budget Allocation

• A description of how each New ATM 

Requirements activity is quantified

• Information on how activities related 

to data comm and NAS Systems in a 

cloud environment are coordinated

• Detail on the vision for future NAS 

information systems

Francisco 

Bermudez

Closed 

3/28/18

4. Operations Concept Development & 

Infrastructure (ATDP) will the provide 

details to the subcommittee on 

Operational Concept work

• Provide additional detail on next 

Operations Concept Development

• Review the scope of Operational 

Concept research

• Overview of the processes that has 

been defined to structure and align 

concept definition and validation

Maureen 

Keegan

Closed 

3/28/18
12

OPEN ACTION ITEMS

March 2018 NAS Ops Meeting

Action Assigned Status

New ATM Requirements

• The subcommittee asks that, at future meetings, the 

funding amount that has been allocated to each 

subtask is also provided along with the subtask 

descriptions.

• The subcommittee requests additional information on 

how the 1A09D portfolio will support potential ATM 

changes driven by these disruptive concepts and 

technologies.

Arthur 

Orton Open

Pathfinder

• The Subcommittee requests this project to include 

budget, progress, plans, and implications to the 

broader needs of UAS in the NAS, UTM, and such 

emerging developments as Urban Air Mobility and 

related airspace management needs.

Steve 

Bradford Open

Cybersecurity

• The Subcommittee requests this project to include 

budget, progress, plans, and summary of the publicprivate partnering aspect of the project.

Isadore B. Open

Remote Tower Project

• The Subcommittee requests this project to include 

budget, progress, plans, and the implications of 

advancements such as space-based ADS-B.

Open

ATDP - Operations Concept Development and 

Infrastructure

• The subcommittee requests that these briefings detail 

how research in these three areas is mitigating risk 

associated with the operational integration of these 

concepts.

• The subcommittee also requests information about 

how funding within the budget line is divided between 

the three identified focus areas.

Maureen 

Keegan Open

• Description of how existing NextGen 

processes are being used to inform 

research
13

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

September 2017 NAS Ops Meeting

Findings Status

1) Commercial Space Transportation (CST) (Fall_2017_1) Open – Pending official 

FAA Response

2) Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Pathfinder Areas 1, 2, and 3 

(Fall_2017_2)

Open – Pending official 

FAA Response

3) Human Factors Research Activities Open – Pending official 

FAA Response

March 2018 NAS Ops Meeting

Findings Status

1) Commercial Space Transportation (CST) (Spring_2018_1) Open

2) ATDP - Operations Concept Development and Infrastructure 

(BLI 1A01C) (Spring_2018_2)

Open

3) NextGen ATC/TechOps Human Factors (Spring_2018_3) Open
14

ATTENDEES

Subcommittee Members in Attendance:

Leo Prusak (Chairperson) Jim Kuchar

Francisco Bermudez (DFO) Dr. John Hansman

Bruce Holmes John Cavolowsky

Mark Weber Emily Stelzer

Andres Zellweger

Others in Attendance:

Shelley Yak Akaki Kunchulia

Chinita Roundtree-Coleman Maureen Molz

Mike Gallivan Randy Bass

Frank Wondolowski Tom Prevot

John Maffei Steve Bradford

Dan Herschler Monique Moore

Gary Pokodner Farzad Davarya

Evelina Bern Brian Duvall

Arthur Orton Sabreena Azam

Patt Watts Todd Lewis

Gregory Pray Chris Devlin

Sadaf Alam Mark DeNicuolo

Joseph Ivkovic Paul Wilde
15

AGENDA

Tuesday, March 27th (JMA Offices: Tuskegee Conference Room 430E)

Time Topic Presenter(s)

0800-0815 Welcome/Overview Leo Prusak 

Francisco Bermudez

0815-0845 Review of REDAC Recommendations, Responses and Open 

Actions Leo Prusak

0845-0915 Budget Briefing Mike Gallivan

0915-0945 1A09D NextGen – New Air Traffic Management Requirements

Steve Bradford 

Arthur Orton

0945-1015 Deep Dive – UAS Topics

 UAS in the NAS and UTM/DAC interaction with RTTs

Steve Bradford

1015-1030 Break

1030-1100 Deep Dive – Next Gen Concept Development and Validation 

Process Overview Steve Bradford

1100-1130 Deep Dive – TBO John Maffei

1130-1200 1A01C Operations Concept Validation & Infrastructure (ATDP) Maureen Keegan

1200-1300 Lunch

1300-1330 A11.N Commercial Space Transportation (CST) Paul Wilde

1330-1400 COE Briefing Pat Watts/Jason Coon

1400-1430 A11.K Aviation Weather Research Program (AWRP) Randy Bass

1430-1500 A12.e NextGen – Weather Technology in the Cockpit (WITC) Gary Pokodner

1500-1530 Subcommittee Discussion Subcommittee

1530-1545 Break

1545-1630 UBER Elevate Tom Prevot

1630 Dinner – location TBD
16

Wednesday, March 28th (Engility Offices: Anacostia B Conference Room)

Time Topic Presenter(s)

0800-0830 Review Findings and Recommendations / New Actions Leo Prusak

0830-0930 Future Issues and Opportunities Reassessment Subcommittee

0930-1000

1A01A Runway Incursion Reduction (RIRP) Update 

Progress of RIRP benefits analysis

Maria DeRosa

1000-1030 1A07A0 NextGen ATC/Tech Ops Human Factors Sabreena Azam

1030-1100 A11.i Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors Dan Herschler

1100-1115 Break

1115-1145 FY19 President’s Budget Submission Implications Subcommittee

1145-1230

Subcommittee Discussion 

Recap & Closing

Subcommittee 

Leo Prusak