MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Proceedings – Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Executive Council –
DoD and Management Sessions
A. GENERAL
The Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Executive Council began at 0800 hours on 16 Sep 09
at the Campfire Girls Conference Center, Ft Worth, Texas. The FAA Central Service Area Headquarters
hosted the meeting and provided outstanding support.
B. COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS FOR 16 SEP 09
1. Welcoming Remarks, Objectives and Introductions – DoD Session. Colonel Neumann (HQ
WI ANG) introduced Brig Gen Soileau (LAANG/CoS) for welcome and remarks. Colonel
Neumann then provided an overview of the Airspace/Range Council process and explained how
important it is to have collaboration between agencies that have an interest in this process.
 He stressed the importance of having an attendance list with up to date contact information.
 He asked the attendees to start thinking whether future Executive Council meetings should
include a separate DoD Session.
 After introductions and administrative items, he introduced Brig Gen Rice.
2. National Issues – Brig Gen Rice (JFHQ MA ANG/AAG and National Co-Chair)
 Everyone has a stake in the airspace process.
 How do we as a group incorporate UAS into existing range/airspace, and address the
operational, environmental and safety concerns?
o A limiting factor is getting UAS aircraft in the air from the airfield.
o It is a continuing process to get to the maximum level of safety.
o Sense and avoid is the direction we are headed.
 80% of the UAS training in the United States will be done by the ANG outside of restricted
airspace.
 The last thing needed is legislative oversight of the airspace process.
 Red River Working Group formed to work the North Dakota UAS issue.
 Lost link is a continuing problem.
 It is imperative to have the Airspace Roadmap completed and reviewed by ANG Senior
Leadership by December 2009.
 With 2,000 fighters in the current inventory, how will the acquisition of up to 1,700+ F-35s,
affect the ANG Force Structure?
o It is envisioned that of 10 current F-16 GP units, only 4 will transition to the F-35. Given
that, what are other needs (UAS, Bombers, Transport, etc.) that may be appropriate for
the ANG force structure.
 Brig Gen Rice thanked everyone for coming, and again stressed how important it is to
explore all options, and to design a roadmap to bring forward to the FAA to begin to resolve
some of these longstanding operational constraints.
 Lt Gen Wyatt, Director of the Air National Guard, wants an outbrief from the National
Airspace/Range Executive Council meeting in December. So does Mr. Hank Krakowski,
Deputy Administrator of the FAA.
 A question raised was how to have a unit roadmap when the units have no idea what the
future holds for them, such as how to do an advance environmental analysis without a current
“requirement?”
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
1
o

Brig Gen Rice indicated this was a very valid point. The ANG is working to compile
data that can be used to achieve Categorical Exclusions (CATEXs) and reduce the cost
and timeframes to achieve environmental solutions.
Brig Gen Mitchell mentioned how important it is to have the Airline Pilots union on board
for airspace issues.
o He added that it would help quantify our position by putting a price tag on use or loss of
airspace similar to how the airlines do it.
o The top two FAA positions are held by ex-airline pilots.
o FAA union is getting stronger and has to be kept in the loop.
3. Air Staff Initiatives – Lt Col Sigley (AF/A3O-AAN) and Major Paton (AF/A3O-AR)
 The Range/Airspace Air Staff is reorganizing and dealing with some understaffing issues.
o Colonel Chupein (A3O-AR) is now the Division Chief.
o The A3O-AAN office is responsible to coordinate with the FAA on all military aviation
matters, including airspace integration of UAS.
 Today’s Air Ranges – Historical Perspective
o Target fidelity lagged from the 90s
o Trends with new targets are positive
o What has changed? Demand for C2ISR information and ability to process it.
 Special Use Airspace/Training Routes - How to use effectively
 Airspace Policy
o UAS in the NAS. The Red River Working Group (in partnership with the FAA) is
working to find solutions to enable UAS access to the NAS
o The establishment of some type of positive control airspace is a short-term solution until
we see true sense and avoid capability.
 Holiday Airspace Release Program
o In 2008, release of DoD airspace resulted in significant fuel savings to civilian aviation.
o Time periods around Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year have been identified to
provide greater impact to civilian aviation in 2009.
 Adaptive Airspace
o “Dynamic, Predictable Airspace” – New momentum
o FAA and Aviation Industry Leaders discussed fuel saving initiatives during Fuel Summit
in Nov 2008.
o One of the 5 initiatives is to allow greater access to military SUA and Air Traffic Control
Assigned Airspace (ATCAA) for non-participating aircraft.
o Redesign of existing ATCAAs could expedite enroute flow, arrival and departures, and
assist SWAP.
o ATCAAs can be modified with only changes to LOAs; no environmental needed.
 FAA/DoD Proof of Concept
o FAA Centers nominated 13 specific sites to HQ FAA as candidates. FAA wants
prioritized list for each service area. Units should work with ARTCCs for possible
modifications. USAF not required to modify ATCAAs if it doesn’t make sense.
o Central Service Area
 Rosie ATCAA (Albuquerque ARTCC)
 Alpena ATCAA (Minneapolis ARTCC)
 Buckeye ATCAA (Indianapolis ARTCC)
 Lancer ATCAA (Fort Worth ARTCC)
 Sioux ATCAA (Memphis ARTCC)
 Tiger ATCAA (Houston ARTCC)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
2
o




Eastern Service Area
 Shirley ATCAA (Memphis ARTCC)
 Grove Hill 2 ATCAA (Atlanta ARTCC)
 Carrabelle ATCAA (Jacksonville ARTCC)
 Placid/Avon ATCAAs (Miami ARTCC)
 Laser E/W/N/S ATCAAs (Boston ARTCC)
o Western Service Area
 Naknek ATCAA (Anchorage ARTCC)
Optimal routing for DoD Aircraft. If the FAA will agree to optimal routing for military
operations in the future, we can possibly modify Warning Areas to improve civil aviation
routing off the coast.
o If the DoD can count on optimized routing, Warning Areas could be moved farther off
the coast. The fuel “saved” in optimal routing would enable the same amount of loiter
time in warning areas farther off the coast.
Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE) is a major issue.
o Provides common range scheduling and database management system for use across Air
Force Ranges.
o Web-based, CAC enabled, SOA compliant
o Spiral Development: MADE, PEX, RFMSS, Scoring Systems, RAND
o Funding: 2009 - 2012
o CSE: NTTR, UTTR, PARC, Eglin, EDW, White Sands
CSE – Air Force: Primary Training Routes (PTR)s, ADS, un-tethered SUA
 BETA Test – Mar 09: BMGR, Volk Field, JPG, EADS
 PTR Fielding – 2009/10
o CSE – STTR: Space Test & Training Range, Shriever AFB
F-35 Bed-down
o Diverse and divergent points of view and creating a lot of interest
o Balancing act. Meet operational needs vs. environment
o Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) in progress.
o Bed down of F-35 at Eglin AFB – and possible AETC introduction of F-35 into Tyndall –
requires optimum airspace design, scheduling, and utilization to meet mission
requirements.
o Tremendous growth of civil aviation in the Gulf Region.
Renewable Energy/Operating Space - A Priority for our nation and the AF
o Double current alternative energy capacity in 3 years
o Energy independence in 10 years. Viable energy projects that do not impact AF
operations are compatible neighbors to our installations & ranges.
o Current issues
 Wind energy
 Offshore drilling
 NV Alternative Energy Task Force
 Energy Corridors
 Impact Studies
 Federal Renewable Energy Zones (FREZ)
o Horizon: Geothermal, Solar (Solar towers can go to 2,000 feet above ground level;
current proposals in US for 670-foot structures)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
3
o


Communication
 Low level routes over National Parks
 Low level routes over Tribal Lands
 Example of Dyess AFB with routes over both
 Stressed how important it is to keep the lines of communication open to civilian
agencies affected by military operations
o Sustaining Military Readiness
 Stewardship/Partnership/Legacy Program. 80,000 acres of the Barry M. Goldwater
range has been made available for sheep grazing.
 The operational impact requires a clearing pass prior to first drop.
During session wrap-up, it was mentioned that under the Endangered Species Act, the “Safe
Harbor” program can potentially protect and/or open new opportunities for military airspace
when evidence shows the endangered species can co-exist with military operations.
Much discussion regarding the impact of wind farm development’s effect on ground-based
radars. There is probably a window of opportunity to work with the FAA to analyze this
issue rather than use the “stiff-arm” approach.
o Colonel Neumann suggested this discussion be tabled until later in the morning session
when it would be covered in more detail and may require a new action item.
o Colonel Neumann raised again the issue of whether or not to have the FAA present in
future Executive Sessions.
 The consensus was future meetings should continue to have a “DoD only” portion to
allow potentially contentious discussion in-house before the issue is opened to the
FAA.
4. Action Item Status – Mr. Weppner (QinetiQ-North America)
 GARS
o BACKGROUND: Global Area Reference System (GARS) has been developed to easily
identify area locations for activities such as air refueling orbits, combat air patrol orbits,
and initial contact points for operations with ground units. Ranges need to adapt this
worldwide system to their local environment and set up scenarios that utilize the system
by overlaying existing airspace on the GARS grid for real world training.
o ACTION ITEM: Implement GARS to identify/define airspace and ranges.
o OPR: AF/A3O-AYR
OCR: Units/Ranges
o Status: IN PROGRESS. AF/A3O-AR is coordinating GARS implementation with Air
Battle Management.
 Continuation Training Airspace for Predator
o BACKGROUND: How do we establish airspace for the Predator when continuationtraining requirements for the Predator have not been identified? (Some FTU requirements
exist but are not deemed adequate for continuation training.) Training requirements will
be heaviest on the sensor operator and currently Restricted Airspace is required to
accomplish training. Other users of the NAS will likely contest new Restricted Airspace.
o ACTION ITEM: Identify continuation training airspace requirements for the Predator
UAV.
o OPR: HQ ACC/A3Y
OCR: HQ USAF/A3O-AR
o Status: IN PROGRESS. Airspace requirements included in the T/TSNS for Grand Forks,
although no clearly defined requirement has been established. RAND Study identifies
minimum UAS airspace requirements (15 NM x 15 NM for Predator).
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
4





Environmental CATEX
o BACKGROUND: CATEXs in 32 CFR Part 989 – discussion suggested that the FAA
regulation should be changed to accept DoD CATEXs. Colonel Mixon said that the Air
Force would have to provide documentation that that FAA could accept. Mr. Welch
asked if an action Item might be appropriate to go back and re-evaluate past CATEX
actions in light of now having more environmental data available.
o ACTION ITEM: Address the issue of FAA acceptable environmental CATEXs
o OPR: HQ USAF/A3O-AR
o Status: IN PROCESS. A3O-AR is reviewing EISs from recently approved Air Force
airspace actions for environmental data to support CATEXs.
o COMMENT: Brig Gen Rice would like an update on the issue.
DoD and DHS Ops with SUA
o ACTION ITEM: Develop standard for simultaneous DoD and DHS operations within
SUA.
o OPR: HQ USAF A3O-AYI
OCR: DHS; Other Services
o Status: IN PROCESS. Agreement is still with DHS. AYI will continue to follow up.
o Current State: DHS is working the MOU and it is on track for signature. Upon receipt
of the signed document from CBP, Lt Col Brooks intends to staff it through the DoD for
PBFA signature.
Environmental for Small UAS
o BACKGROUND: Question on whether AFSOC is taking the lead on establishing a
“programmatic” document outlining baseline environmental aspects for UAS operations.
o ACTION ITEM: AFSOC to develop EIS guidelines for smaller UAS.
o OPR: AFSOC
OCR: HQ USAF/A7CI
o Status: IN PROCESS. AFSOC is working with AF/A7CI to determine the best wayforward to resolve this item. AFSOC with the assistance of AF/A7CI will look at the
feasibility of establishing a “programmatic” document outlining baseline environmental
aspects for UAS operations.
Airspace Coordination Plan
o DISCUSSION: Airspace Coordination Plans for States are needed for de-confliction of
participating military aircraft in support of Civil Emergencies.
o ACTION ITEM: Regional Co-Chairmen will work with State Aviation Officials and
State National Guard DOs to finalize Memorandum of Agreement between the Sate
National Guard and HQ 1st Air Force (AFNORTH).
o OPR: ARC Co-Chairmen
OCR: State DOs
o Suspense: National Airspace Range Executive Council meeting in Dec 09.
o Status: About six states are signed up; still looking for TAG endorsements and
attempting to get state aviation officers (military) to coordinate.
o COMMENT: Also, the council will identify which states are complete and which are
outstanding and revisit this issue at the National Airspace Range Executive Council
meeting. Would a re-attack by 1AF be appropriate?
MULTI-DEPARTMENT STUDY GROUP ON PUBLIC LANDS
o DISCUSSION: At NWM Management ARC, March 2009, the discussion concerning
potential new wilderness areas identified the requirement for the development of a multidepartment study group to evaluate these sites and provide recommendations for the
establishing legislation. The desired level of coordination would be at the lowest local or
state level similar to the Preliminary Wind Energy sitting capability.
o ACTION ITEM: Request that the Department of Defense join with the Departments of
Agriculture, Interior, and Energy in forming a joint local study group at the National
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
5



Forest or BLM District level to provide recommendations for the establishment of new
wilderness areas.
o OPR: HQ USAF/A3O-AYR
o Suspense: National Airspace Range Executive Council meeting in Dec 09.
o Status: NEW
MILITARY TRAINING ROUTE TURN POINT IDENTIFICATION
o DISCUSSION: At NWM Management ARC, March 2009, the discussion concerning the
affects of large magnetic variation changes in Alaska identified the requirement to
improve the AP1-B updates. MTRs are defined by Latitude and Longitude of turn points
and the Fix, Radial and Distance (FRD) from the nearest NAVAID is calculated and
added to the turn point description. The FRDs changed dramatically in Alaska over just a
few years.
o ACTION ITEM: Request that the Department of Defense work with the FAA to
develop an improved method to update the FRD information in AP1-B when the
magnetic variations for NAVAIDs are changed.
o OPR: HQ USAF/A3O-AR
o Suspense: National Airspace Range Executive Council meeting in Dec 09.
o Status: NEW
OBSTACLE DATABASE CONSOLIDATION
o DISCUSSION: At NWM Management ARC, March 2009, a request was made to
eliminate the duplication and discrepancies between the two obstacle databases. One
problem identified was that Falcon View in a 70 x 100 nm view has two different
databases.
o ACTION ITEM: Request that the Department of Defense work with the FAA to
consolidate obstacle clearance data to a single database.
o OPR: HQ USAF/A3O-AR
o Suspense: National Airspace Range Executive Council meeting in Dec 09.
o Status: NEW
SUBMISSION OF AIRSPACE AND MTR REQUESTS
 DISCUSSION: At CGL ARC, May 2009 -- A hard copy Sectional Chart is required
when submitting airspace proposals. Falcon View depictions can vary based on two data
bases within the system. A hard copy is required for submission of an MTR request. Further
coordination necessitates fax copies be produced and accuracy of details is often
compromised by multiple transmissions. An email submission would eliminate this problem
and assure accuracy of the request.
 ACTION ITEM: Standardize Falcon View to utilize WGS 84 System for accuracy.
Refine 7110.4 MTR process to utilize email submission of requests. Establish a trail at the
Service Center.
 OPR: HQ USAF/A3O-AR
 Suspense: National Airspace Range Executive Council meeting in Dec 09.
 Status: NEW
 COMMENT: The Council discussed the concern that the Falcon View version of the
maps is a “compressed view” and the AF is indicating the hard copy submission must be
manually generated. Can an “uncompressed” PDF version be generated?
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
6
5. Topics of Interest –
 Airspace Development – Mr. Landon Jones (NGB/A3AA)
o Preliminary Actions
 Develop a “Vision Statement” that sets forth the basic goal of the airspace proposal
o The Concept
 Based on requirement that is clearly justified
 Conduct early informal discussions with FAA
 Discuss/coordinate concept with MAJCOM
 Bring your regional AFTREP on board early.
 Scope early and frequently to determine impact on external stakeholders
 Evaluate possible environmental conflicts
 Top 3 coordination; USFWS, SHPO, Tribes. The FAA may identify others through
scoping, NPS, BLM, etc.
 Brief concept to Regional Airspace Council
o The Adjutant General (TAG)\
 Brief TAG(s) involved to gain support
 Actions may elevate to Governor, politics
 Brief Local and Congressional members
 Initiate PA, JA, awareness
o Concept to Formal Proposal
 Proponent develops T/TSNS
 Submit T/TSNS to MAJCOM/Airstaff
 Proponent submits AF 813 requesting EIAP
 MAJCOM formally request Coop Agcy Status
 MAJCOM & Proponent: Develop Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
(DOPAA)
 Draft Aeronautical Proposal IAW FAAO 7400.2
o The FAA
 AFREPS are your primary interface with the FAA
 Brief and discuss proposal with Regional HQ of negotiated site, altitudes and times
of use
 It was mentioned that a key component at the local level is coordination with
other DoD users
 Maintain contact as circularization and comments return on AP
 Maintain contact with MAJCOM/Contractor preparing EIAP documentation
o The Politics
 Documents must be written to exact FAA Order Standards for adoption
 AP and Environmental docs must match
 Outside Stakeholders will leverage impact
 Mitigate to the best possible practice
o Best Practices
 Requirement driven concept/proposal
 Marketing plan, selling the concept and have them provide the solution. Early
coordination is critical
 Spend time on graphics. Develop it as if your next-door neighbor is reading it.
 NEPA/Airspace Mgmt training available
 ANG Airspace Portal, checklist coming soon
 Talk to those who have gone before you
o Discussion: A boiler plate of aircraft requirements is needed. The Rand Study will
provide that. Make sure all DoD entities are included in airspace/range concepts and the
military representatives to the FAA are involved.
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
7

NEXTGEN – Major Marentette (AF/A3O-AA)
o Current air transportation system is reaching its limits; projected growth will result in
system gridlock
 2012 - 2015: System capacity maxed
 2025: Double to triple 2005 demand
 Without modernization, US economic loss due to gridlock = $40B by 2033
o The NAS must transform to ensure it meets national safety, security, mobility, efficiency,
and capacity needs of 2025
 Congress: PL 108-176, Vision 100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act
 Chartered Joint Planning & Development Office (JPDO) and established
NextGen goals
 President:
Executive Order 13479, Transformation of the National Air
Transportation System
 Instructed SECDEF to assist SECTRANS so that NextGen meets defense needs
 DEPSECDEF: 28 Dec 07 memo to NextGen stakeholders
 Designated AF as NextGen Lead Service
o Overarching NextGen Guidance
o DoD NextGen Coordination – focus is long term (2018-2025)
 Why? Volume of aircraft and SUA
o DoD Policy Board on Federal Aviation – three levels of coordination.
o A3O-A – Air Operations is the AF Lead
o Nine NEXTGEN working groups
o What is NextGen? (Depends who you ask).
 To the point-to-point community (e.g. airlines and airlift, it’s about efficient arrivals
and departures and the capabilities that enable them
 To the range and airspace community, it’s mainly about preserving the capability
represented by today’s SUA structure
o NextGen Transformation
 From ground-based to satellite-based navigation
 From voice radio to data control
 Disconnected information system to net-centric access
 Human centric Air Traffic Control to automated assistance
 Fragmented weather forecasting to probabilistic decision tools
 Et al
o DoD’s participation in NextGen provides:
 Policy influence at the developmental stage
 DoD representation in its unique role as a NAS user/service provider/regulatory
partner
 Seamless interoperability with and global access to civil aviation systems
 Integrated air domain surveillance and intelligence
 User benefits—e.g. fuel savings, improved weather info
 Sharing of R&D, technology and procedural improvements
 Phase out of resource-intensive legacy systems
o Current DoD Involvement
 Combined NOTAM system and graphical NOTALS
 GPS constellation improvement
 HARP & CSE
 Synthetic Fuels
 UAS
 JPALS
 Optimum Profile Descents (OPD)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
8
o
o
o
Current DoD Next Gen Hot Topics
 UAS integration into NAS equipage
 Net-centric ops
 Integrated surveillance
 Technology transfer
 NextGen procedures and training for aircrews/ATC
 Leveraging NextGen capabilities in deployed environment
 Formalized DoD NextGen roles, responsibilities, architecture, strategic plan
Bottom Line
 A transformed NAS is inevitable, but we can influence the end state
 Global engagement is more important than ever
 NextGen is about capabilities, not technology alone
Lead Service Office Info
 Chief, DoD NextGen LSO
 Colonel Dave Jones, DSN 426-1407
 Acting Chief, DoD NextGen Division
 Major Lenore Marentette, DSN 425-0638
 NextGen Support
 Mr. Braden DeLauder, DSN 425-0573
 E-mail: NextGen@pentagon.af.mil
 Websites:
 https://afkm.wpafb.af.mil/ASPs/CoP/EntryCoP.asp?Filter=OO-XP-AF-36
 https://wwwd.my.af.mil/afknprod/ASPs/CoP/EntryCoP.asp?Filter=OO-XP-AF36 (via AF Portal)
6. F-35 Basing Process– Major Lippert (NGB/A7AM)
 Major Lippert showed an example of the Eglin AFB current noise contours vs. future
contours with the F-35 and explained this is a significant issue in the basing process.
 How to handle the costs of property acquisition, soundproofing upgrades.
o FAA to spend $2.5 million at Eglin this year, $1.0 million next year to mitigate sound
impacts.
 Pavement damage problems with downward facing IPP exhaust port:
o Burn mode. During startup and regular maintenance, concrete on the parking apron
reaches over 400˚F
 17 startup cycles …will destroy normal concrete
o Burn and Bleed mode
 During taxi operations, any asphalt surfaces will heat up to over 200˚F
 Asphalt …will melt at these temperatures
o Parking spots and asphalt surfaces at the hold short points must be replaced
o At Eglin, total cost for airfield improvements (asphalt to concrete) = $23.4 million.
 Fighter Aircraft Sound Exposure level (SEL) …
o Normalized SEL vs. Aircraft Power Setting
o Joint Communications Release
 JSF Program Office & Lockheed Martin
 Subject: F-35 Acoustics Based on Edwards AFB Acoustics Test
 Date: April 2009
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
9





 Summary of Community Acoustics
 The F-35 community acoustics are comparable to the acoustics of other current
generation aircraft
 Examples include F-22A and F-18 E/F
 Acoustic levels experienced by the public depend on a number of conditions
 Observer location in relation to aircraft
 Flight profiles as required by future test and operational requirements
(Aircraft configuration, aerodynamics, power settings, approach & departure
profiles, and air speed)
 Weather: temperature, humidity, wind
 Airfield acoustics: Reflective structures, vegetation, and terrain in and
around airfield
 Time of day
 Total number of flight operations per year
 Length of time listener is exposed to aircraft
F-35 Acoustics Testing: Future Results Anticipated
o ·“Advanced Ground Crew Hearing Protection” by JSF Program Office
 Goal : reduce exposure levels for ground personnel to below current aircraft
 Lockheed Martin contracted to develop new hearing protection devices to protect F35 pilots, maintainers, and carrier deck crews
 Developed devices will utilize state-of-the-art active noise reduction techniques
Train Wreck
o Eglin’s EIS cost & time of completion is TBD
o R & D for a new type of concrete is TBD
o “F-16 Bathtub” is on the fast track
o $$$ - scarce and drying up
o F-35 buy is not one-to-one
o SO NOW WHAT??
 How about developing a better plan?
4 Steps in Developing System
o List CRITERIA, define how to MEASURE the criteria, define how to SCORE the
measurements and how to WEIGHT the scores.
3 Qualities of the System –Transparent, Defensible and Repeatable
Used example of F-35 Training Criteria – 1 Squadron
o Analyze Mission, Capacity, Cost and Environmental attribute.
C. MORNING SESSION WRAP UP - Colonel Neumann thanked the presenters. He affirmed the
decision to keep the DoD-only session. He also urged attendees not to use acronyms during the
afternoon session without explaining them to our non-DoD counterparts. The DoD session adjourned
at 12:05 hours, 16 Sep 09.
D. COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS FOR THE AFTERNOON OF 16 SEP 09
1. Opening Remarks – Colonel Neumann and Mr. Lowe (FAA Central Svc Area (ATO-R).
Colonel Neumann opened the Management Session and surveyed the attendees to see how many
people were “new” to this process. After introductions, he thanked all for taking part in the
meeting and introduced Mr. Lowe, who also welcomed the attendees and reaffirmed the need for
this process to keep the lines of communication open.
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
10
2. National Perspectives – Brig General Rice
 Leadership is the key to solving airspace issues, while “Management” is process oriented
 Current processes still lack a collective way of moving forward.
 While some of our initiatives make perfect sense to us, the process becomes the challenge;
therefore the reason for these meetings is to find ways to continually improve the process.
 Hopefully, these meetings will lead to make changes to cumbersome processes that are smart,
and productive.
3. FAA Perspectives – Lt Col Harper (FAA Central Service Area, ASW-910)
 Status of Airspace Actions
o Proponent: 119th Fighter Wing (ANG), Fargo, ND
 Airspace Objectives: Create new Restricted Area airspace for Predator and Global
Hawk aircraft to be stationed at Grand Forks
 Precedent-setting requirement – BRAC driven
 One of several options under consideration to meet mission
 Aeronautical: Guard Bureau responsible for the Aeronautical Proposal
 AP first submitted to FAA CSA – returned without action Mar 09
 AP resubmitted to HQ FAA review 6 Aug 09
 Environmental: AMC responsible for EIS/EA
 Roadblocks:
 FAA Policy – no new RAs for sole UAS use
 7400.2 requirements vs. non-hazardous activity
 AF can’t operate strictly under COA (spotters/chase planes)
o Proponent: Alpena CRTC (ANG) MI
 Airspace Objectives: Create new MOA over Grayling Range (R-4201-Army owned)
to allow USAF aircraft to conduct urban CAS training.
 Includes mid-level IR route bridges between Pike and Steelhead MOAS and new
MOA
 Initial buy in with Minneapolis ARTCC
 Telecons held 20 Aug and 10 Sep to introduce concept to FAA CSA
 Roadblocks:
 Victor Airway 609 impacted by new MOA
 R-4201B environmentally certified for rotary-wind aircraft only
 NGB advises no new money for new environmental until 2012
o Proponent: 29th Bomb Wing, Ellsworth AFB, SD
 Airspace Objectives: Modify Powder River MOA and create Powder River ATCCAs
 In New Concept stage
 Aeronautical: Estimate formal proposal submission, Sep 09
 Incorporates feedback from ZLC, ZDV, and ZMP
 Environmental:
 Draft EIS in the works with public hearings in spring 2010
o HAWKI Temp MOA
 11 August to 4 September 2009 – Exercise BADGER DENIAL
 Created separate MOA underneath CRYPT SOUTH MOA
 Requested altitude from 8,000 MSL to 3,000 MSL
 Minneapolis ARTCC approved 4,500-8,000 MSL – clarified “Other Times by
NOTAM” statement
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
11
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Playas Temporary MOA
 David-Monthan AFB initiative for exercise support
 Activation date is April 2010 for two weeks
 Altitudes from 300’ AGL to FL 180
Vance AFB MOA proposal
 Change the Vance MOA floor from 10,000 MSL to 8,000 MSL
 Needed to meet training requirements
 Proponent is pursuing a supplemental environmental evaluation
DeSoto MOA Modifications
 Proposal to expand vertical MOA dimension up to FL 180
 Activated around peak civil air traffic (10 a.m. to 3 p.m.)
 Gulfport Combat Readiness Training Center refining their scheduling process
 Requires coordination with Army Guard on R-4401 Utilization
 Requires installation of communication lines with FAA facilities
Snake MOA/WA-XX/W-453 proposal
 Proposal to subdivide Warning area, create additional Warning Area, and establish
MOA
 Will enhance industry access to oil and gas rigs in the Gulf
 Package currently in coordination with HQ FAA
ARX 197 H/L Proposal
 Changes routing on existing track
 AFREP coordinating the communications rendezvous plan
AR 113 E/W Relocation proposal (lesson learned, signatures needed!)
 Involves moving the ARIP/ARCP from Fort Worth to Houston Center airspace
 Package coordination for signature
AR-108 Modifications
 Changes driven by ADS-B implementation in the Gulf
 Deleting the SODAR requirement and adding QNH altitudes
 Modifications sent to proponent to coordinate signatures
Electronic Flight Progress Strip Testing
 Sheppard Air Force Base
 Site acceptance testing complete
 System is in fully operational capability and in use
Vance Air Force Base
 Site acceptance testing is ongoing
 Expect fully operational capability in Sep 09
Long Range Radar Feed Requests
 Sheppard Air Force Base
 Request for Oklahoma City LRR feed signed by wing commander
 Processed through FAA NAS Defense Coordinator
 Sheppard is Ordering the FTI circuits to receive the radar data
 Vance Air Force Base
 Request for Putnam LRR feed signed by wing commander.
 Sent to FAA NAS Defense Coordinator
Current/Proposed Gulf of Mexico Route Structure
 Plan to implement these routes in the first quarter of 2011, looking for ways to
mitigate potential impacts.
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
12



Contact Information.
o Lt Col Tony Harper, email: tony.harper@faa.gov
o Major Jamie Flanders, email: jamie.flanders@faa.gov
Phone:
o Voice: DSN: 477-2910, Comm: (817) 222-5910
o FAX: DSN: 477-2992, Comm: (817) 222-2992
Discussion: Commander Templeton (NAVREP) briefed proposed route structure changes
over the Gulf of Mexico by the FAA in the 2011/2012 timeframe. They present concerns for
the military. Colonel Neumann said to make sure we were involved in the process.
4. DTO Perspectives – Mr. Lowe (FAA CSA (ATO-R))
 Civilian NAS customers interest in SUA
o No longer a “Big Sky” theory
o Collaborative decision making to improve mission completion
o Engage stakeholders early & often
 Gulf of Mexico Regional Airspace Strategic Initiative (GRASI)
o Effort to reach out to a wide variety of stakeholders
o Ensure continued viability of regional airspace during anticipated growth in military and
civilian aviation.
 New approach designed to involve civilian stakeholders at the beginning of process.
o Develop a coordinated strategic plan that accommodates all users while maintaining a
neutral or positive economic impact to the region
 All stakeholder requirements identified to this point indicate all missions can be
accommodated if airspace across region is utilized efficiently
o Comprised of an Executive Steering Committee and Stakeholder Working Group
 Roles and responsibilities – Executive Steering Committee (ESC)
 Policy officials from DoD, FAA/ATO, state aviation officials and civilian
aviation organizations
 Define expectations, review work and determine the final recommendations
 Provide guidance and direction to the overall effort, resolve policy issues and
serve as the approval authority for products developed by the SWG
 Approve the baseline information and define performance expectations
 Approve the concepts for study and review the results
 Approve proposed alternatives, review modeling and chose a preferred
alternative.
 Stakeholder Working Groups
 Comprised of military and civilian stakeholders with technical backgrounds
necessary to conduct the research and analysis and provide input to the
deliverables
 Accomplish the required work as directed by the ESC and will keep the ESC
appraised of progress and decision points.
 SWG will lead the documentation of the requirements, projected growth, and
baseline data
 May be made up of one or two representatives from the same organizations that
comprise the ESC
 Other organizations may be added to the SWG as the plan develops and core
expertise or needs arise that may be identified by either the ESC or the SWG
 DoD may establish a supplemental working group for the purpose of working
internal issues prior to engaging the other regional stakeholders and will keep the
ESC and SWG appraised of progress and decision points
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
13
o




Website
 Up and running for DoD, and will be available to public soon, after undergoing
approval process with DoD Public Affairs
Commercial Space
o Most of their approaches will be contained within or very near to the White Sands
complex with possibilities of commercial and tourism operations
 Could have 2-3 operations daily affecting a 60 mile radius
o These entities are out there, trying to achieve operations that will impact other airspace
activities in the NAS
Strategic Planning
o Working with multiple types of customers to accommodate changing mission
requirements
o SUA/Milops daily mission execution
 Better communications have improved the plan and how to serve both military and
civilian aviation
o Coordinate tactical operations, Large Force Exercises (LFEs), CAPS, TFRS, ALTRVS
o Efficient airspace usage
o Have satisfied customers and positive approval ratings
NextGen is here now!
o Coming in stages
o A foundational piece is ERAM
 Projected operational readiness dates at FAA Centers from October 2009 to October
2010, starting with Salt Lake City and Seattle.
 Concludes with Miami Center in October 2010
Discussion: The airspace around the Florida panhandle may have to change to accommodate
the new Panama City airport and F-35 operations at Eglin AFB. VLJ business fell off due to
the economy but will build up again.
5. Special Activity Airspace (SAA) Automation Overview – Mr. Perkins (HQ FAA/AJR-33)
 Other “non-SUA” type airspace that impacts military or civilian flight
 Overview - Airspace Building Tool.
o Automated process for designing and processing airspace requests, starting with the
GARS system.
 Military Planning - DoD Mission Scheduling Tool and SAMS Scheduling
 Airspace Activation/De-Activation - ultimately tie into the ERAM system within 4-5 years
 Dissemination
o Digital transmission of SAA schedules and updates to external users and internal FAA
systems
 Analysis and Planning. With more complete and accurate SAA data:
o More effective traffic flow telcons
o Better able to track trends and pre-plan efficient routing
o More accurate annual utilization reporting and analysis – Adjustment to published times
of use where needed
 Contact Information:
o Jim Perkins, SAA Lead
Aeronautical Information Management
703-326-3734 (office)
202-450-0136 (cell)
703-326-3896 (fax)
jim.perkins@faa.gov (e-mail)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
14
6. National Special Activity Airspace Project – Mr. Fulmer (FAA National SAA Manager)
 AIM Definition of Special Activity Airspace (SAA)
o Any airspace with defined dimensions within the National Airspace System wherein
limitations may be imposed upon aircraft operations
o This airspace may be restricted areas, prohibited areas, military operations areas, ATC
assigned airspace, and any other designated airspace areas
 Why this initiative now?
o Past drivers
 Long history of issues concerning more efficient and flexible use of SAA
 Recommendations have been proffered for almost two decades, highlighted in nearly
every proposal for system efficiency, including Free Flight and ARC 77 plus
initiatives like National Chokepoint, Playbook and Q Routes
o Current drivers:
 Fuel Forum Initiatives: “Provide Greater use of Military Airspace”
 Airspace Working Group: Improved information sharing, real-time management,
dynamic use of SUA and improved access for all customers identified in group’s
charter
 Enterprise Architecture Operational Improvement: Improved Management of
Airspace for Special Use
 RTCA Task Force 5 on NextGen: More efficient management and use of SAA
identified as a unique capability area
 Numerous FAA policies, procedures, programs, and organizations that speak to SAA:
NextGen, SWIM, FAA Flight Plan…
o RTCA Task Force 5
 Special Activity Airspace: Efficient management and use of SAA through real-time
data exchange of status & schedules
o SAA Challenges
 Not fully automated, contains incomplete data, is not utilized by all DoD customers
nor disseminated
o Mission Statement
 Enhance stewardship of the nation’s SAA by:
 Integrating the many organizations, operators, “types” of airspace, policies/
orders, and technologies that are associated with the management and use of
SAA
 Developing cohesive policies and agreements that will set the cooperative
atmosphere for this effort
 Creating a consistent information flow that will support predictive management
and use of SAA
 Build a measurement system that can be used in all stages of decision making
concerning development, management and use of SAA, which will support
accessibility and transparency of data
 Advancing the various programs and procedures governing use and management
of SAA, including NextGen and other relevant FAA and DOD technology efforts
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
15
o
o
o
How to achieve results:
 Integrating the many elements
 Developing cohesive policies and agreements
 Creating a consistent information flow
 Designing a measurement system
 Formulating specific recommendations or requirements
 Changes in policies, orders, procedures, and guidelines
 Changes in programs or other technologies
 Changes in performance measurement
 Establish Oversight Committee and subcommittees to address these three areas
 Be inclusive of all of our customers in every step of the process
Overview of committee structure
 Oversight committee
 Chair, SAA Project Manager
 ATO Participants: Terminal, Enroute, Tech Ops, Sys Ops, Service Centers
 External Stakeholder Participants: PBFA (DOD), RTCA (Civilian), others may
be determined
 Oversight Committee will draft subcommittee charters and routinely review
subcommittee progress
 All products of the subcommittees will be processed through the Oversight
Committee before moving onto other program areas
 Subcommittees
 Deadlines, timelines and deliverables to be set by the subcommittee co-chairs to
meet Oversight Committee requirements
 Subcommittees will identify the need to communicate and collaborate with other
sub committees
 Each of the three subcommittees will have two co-chairs selected from the
Oversight Committee
 Membership of each subcommittee will be
 Identified and approved by the sub committee co-chairs
 Representative of (but not necessarily limited to) those LOBs and
organizations on the Oversight Committee
Project Deliverables – Preliminary
 Due by September 2010
 Establish Charters which specifies Terms of Reference (TORs) and Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs)
 Terms of Reference and Standard Operating Procedures
 Concept of Operations for SAA
 Technology Neutral
 Requirements Document driven from Ops Concept
 Initial benefits analysis
 Benefits and Consequences
 Expected benefits
 Consideration of all operator’s needs
 Enabling the military to train as they fight.
 Allowing governmental activities while mitigating impact to other operators
 Reduced flight time and distance for civilian and military operators who
leverage enhanced awareness of SAA status to opt for more efficient routes
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
16


 Consequences of inaction? We are stuck with the status quo
 Dysfunctional strategic and tactical planning
 Under-utilized airspace
 Loss of NAS capacity
 Loss of predictability
 Loss of flexibility
 Increased costs and delays
 A squandered opportunity to influence the future of NAS operations
o Air Transport Association 2008 Report
 “….We’re committed to pioneering new technologies. We’re leveraging 75% of our
R&D investments on environmental improvements for future aircraft generations
with an emphasis on CO2, noise, and alternative fuels…..”
o What to do next?
 Brief Operations Council
 This is the senior operational leadership of the FAA
 Brief PBFA
 DOD Policy Board on Federal Aviation
 Identify POCs
 Schedule first set of meetings for the Oversight and Subcommittees
Comment regarding how to deal with weather issues, maintenance delays, etc. and not lose
some flexibility with a precision scheduling process. The objective is to use automation to
have real time knowledge of airspace utilization without eliminating “manual” means of
communicating when these issues arise.
Contact Info:
o Dean Fulmer, National SAA Project Manager
o Email: Dean.Fulmer@FAA.GOV
o Cell: 763-229-0734
7. Strategic Plan for UAS Operations – Lt Col Militello (AF/A30-AAN)
 Roles
o DoD/FAA – multi-level coordination
 Directed in the 2009 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the DoD/FAA
Executive Committee (EXCOM) gives Services a conduit to the Executive Level of
the FAA to address issues that cannot be resolved at lower levels
 Policy/Operational/Systems issues are reviewed at the appropriate level in DoD, and
given full visibility at the FAA
 Challenge
o UAS were bought as a capability, not an aircraft
 Purchased under Joint Capability Technology Demonstration
 Did not go through rigor of aircraft procurement process
 Airworthiness
 Mil specs, safety
 Crew training standards
 Never intended for extended use in non-segregated airspace
o Success has driven need to train/operate nationwide
o AF must step back to go forward; address deficiency areas
 UAS-specific pilot training, medical quals
 Flight rules/procedures
 Airworthiness criteria/enforcement
 Airspace design
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
17
o


AF, Services and OSD are ready to develop & implement UAS access solutions in
collaborative effort with FAA
o AF leads DoD/FAA interface (PBFA Executive Dir)
 Well-positioned to facilitate UAS NAS standards
o Together, AF/DoD & FAA have the competencies to Design and Validate UAS NAS
Standards
o The AF has a significant need, and a significant capability, and;
 An immediate requirement for UAS NAS access
 The majority of M/HA UAS platforms that require access
 The resources and expertise to address the issues
 Extensive development/validation experience
o Environment
 Lack of UAS standards impacts AF operations
 FAA waivers are required for UAS flight in the NAS
 Requires “see and avoid” mitigation
 Waivers cannot keep pace with demand
o Approach – The AF/DOD has expertise to drive UAS standards development
o Areas of Focus – All activities are DoD-integrated and Service/COCOM-Led
o Key Tasks/Milestones – A30 is the Air Force overall lead for UAS integration.
Ground-Based Sense and Avoid
o Envision using radar data at Beale AFB to do accomplish “see and avoid” from nonreporting aircraft contacts.
The Way Ahead
o The Air Force should:
 Normalize UAS as we have with manned aircraft, assimilating them into our existing
requirements/operational processes
 Assume an operational leadership position to help create DoD and national UAS
standards for NAS operations
 Strengthen Service, OSD, and COCOM operational partnership efforts through
established bodies (e.g. PBFA, OSD Task Force)
o We should engage with the FAA to:
 Further develop an interdisciplinary UAS organization with engaged Senior DoD and
FAA leadership
 Use procedural/airspace actions to facilitate near term access
 Work together to develop an interdisciplinary roadmap for NAS access with
near/mid/long term goals and milestones
 Work with as a team to rapidly develop policies for the above
8. Cannon AFB Unmanned Aircraft Systems – Mr. Golliver (HQ AFSOC/A3OUI)
 MQ-1 Predator
o Operations FL180 to FL230
 MQ-9 Reaper
o Flies higher and is more capable
o FY 16/17 at Cannon AFB
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
18






Cannon AFB Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) slide.
o Class D MOA COA (approved) - 2009-CSA-1-MOA
o Day corridor (approved) - 2008-CSA-62
o Northern area + corridor (cancelled by AFSOC) - 2009-CSA-05
o Night corridor (verbally disapproved) - 2008-CSA-63
o Southern area + corridor (*verbally disapproved) - 2009-CSA-04
 Met with HQ FAA on 2 Sep 09 to discuss…
Cannon AFB MQ-1 Airspace Corridor
o Use of on the ground observers and/or chase aircraft is cost prohibitive.
Night Corridor – 2008-CSA-63
o FAA verbally disapproved
 Will not approve COA without a safety case
 Have not defined what is required for an acceptable safety case
 Completed an AFSOC safety case included with COA which was not acceptable
to the FAA
 Requested FAA provide a detailed official memo of disapproval
o Course of Action: Working with Policy Board on Federal Aviation (PBFA) UAS
subgroup and USAF/A3O to develop safety case template
Southern Area 2009 –CSA-04
o FAA verbally disapproved
 Met with HQ FAA two times to work through issues
 During last meeting, the FAA:
 Did not approve COA as requested
 Requested a safety case for collision avoidance
 When/if UA descends below FL180 outside of restricted airspace during an
emergency
 FAA will send an official memo of their proposed options
Cannon AFB MQ-1 Airspace – Northern and Southern Ops Areas
o Two COAs submitted:
 Southern Area Sections 1 & 2 with access to WSMR - cancelled
 Northern Area Sections 4 & 5 Mountainous terrain - revised
o Issues Distance from Restricted Airspace – Engine out glide back ability
Cannon AFB UAS Airspace Requirements
o Lateral
 Tactical maneuvering – from directly over the target out to 10NM
 Ft Sumner, Target complex w/in R-5104
 Ground maneuvering – convoy ops (27NM x 27 NM)
o Vertical
 Ceiling of FL250
 Sensor fidelity
 Floor of 9000 feet MSL (elevation in area approx 4000 feet)
 CONOPS used in theater
o Why R-5104/5 is not sufficient
 Range dimensions incompatible with integrated training with ground forces and other
SOF aircraft
 No urban terrain, no multi-force-on-force ground scenario, and no airfield seizure
opportunities due to limited size of range
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
19


Southern Operating Area FL180B230
o FAA will consider:
 10 – 15NM Ops area west of Melrose Range w/restrictions
 Corridor from Melrose Range to WSMR (FL180-210)
o Agreed to relook at some of the other COA restrictions
 Only one UAS allowed to fly during the day
 No night ops
o FAA will send an official memo of their proposed options
Cannon AFB UAS – Course of Action – Way Ahead
o Waiting for official FAA response to 2 Sep 09 meeting
 Will brief AFSOC leadership on FAA “offer”
 Accept as offered or decline ???
o Interest level very high
E. AFTERNOON SESSION WRAP UP - Colonel Neumann adjourned the afternoon session at 5:05
p.m.
F. COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS FOR THE MORNING OF 17 SEP 09
1. Opening Remarks - Colonel Neumann
 Colonel Neumann reconvened the council meeting at 0805 and asked whether there was
anyone present that had not attended the previous session.
 He then introduced Mr. Wilson to start the morning session.
2. Strategic Visions – Mr. Wilson (Contract support to NGB/A3A)
 Think of the Roadmap as a verb, not a noun
 Our Vision
o The United States Air Force will be a trusted, reliable joint partner with our sister
services known for integrity in all of our activities, including supporting the Joint mission
first and foremost. We will provide compelling air, space and cyber capabilities for use
by the Combatant Commanders. We will excel as stewards of all Air Force resources in
service to the American people, while providing precise and reliable Global Vigilance,
Reach and Power for the Nation.
 From the Air Force Core Functions slide – emphasis on “building partnerships”
 Air Force Priorities – number two is “Partner with Joint and Coalition Team” to win today’s
fight
 Joint, Coalition and Interagency Team
 What we do as part of the “Joint Team”
 Today’s Air Force – Fly, Fight and Win as an integral part of the “Joint Team”
 ANG SPS Background
o Primary tenet: Must operate as a field-driven process
o Key SPS product: ANG Strategic Plan
 Characterize the Region
o Before you begin, step back and look at the Region’s genetics (e.g. space missions, four
corners, public lands)
 Regional Roadmaps are designed to help planners within the regions formulate courses of
action that will meet the needs of the Total Force, Joint Forces, Coalition Partners and,
through dual use, our ANG ‘State’ missions.
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
20





The “Top 8” Changes
o Relevant Range’ published
o Night ops/UAS/Weapons… adaptive/predictable airspace
o Force Structure Changes BRAC/TFI
o Joint Partners & Building Partner Capacities (BPC)
o RAND Study (soon to be published)
o Operating Space Enterprise: Roadmap templates / Specified Range Configuration
o ANG Strategic Planning System (SPS)
o Economic downturn
Roadmap Template
o Introduction
o MAJCOM Summary
 Current mission
 Changes in future mission(s)
 Limitations
 User requirement changes
 Potential capabilities/gaps
o Ten investment areas
o Plans
 Near term
 5 & 10 year
Ten Investment Areas
o Land/Sea
o Air, Space and Cyberspace
o Targets and Target Arrays
o Integrated Air Def. / Counter-Air Def. Systems
o Communication Systems
o Scoring, Feedback and Situational Awareness Systems
o Physical Plant (Real Property and Infrastructure)
o Environmental
o Unexploded Ordnance/ Range Residue Removal
o Management
Specified Range Configuration
o Compare range capabilities to user requirements
o Identify data
o Enterprise-wide look/decision: “to” or “not to”
o Resource allocation and configuration control process
 Specifies configuration
 Configuration control
 Sustains specified configurations
Specified Range Configuration Benefits
o Configuration control
 Increases effectiveness and efficiency
 Economies of scale
 Leverage institutional funding
 Standard configuration = lower sustainment costs
o Institutional backing for range configuration
 To gain “X”
 To not pursue “Y”
o Shared advocacy in Air Force Corporate structure
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
21

Questions/Comments
o From the FAA regarding the “build it and they will come” syndrome, and how much time
and effort is sometimes devoted at unit level to potential airspace actions that are not
driven by a validated requirement.
o It was also noted the purpose of these meetings is for units to bring potential airspace
initiatives for “in-house” review and comment before pursuing with the FAA.
o A comment/concern was also that we should be careful in how much effort is put into
charted airspace given the improvements in technology that should allow more flexible
airspace utilization (provided the environmental aspects are incorporated).
3. ACC Roadmap– Colonel Canipe (HQ ACC/A3A)
 New Weapons Systems
o F/A-22 - Langley AFB has the first Ops Wing
 Elmendorf and Holloman next
o JSF/F-35 – Eglin AFB FTU beddown
 Basing criteria (environmental) to determine other suitable locations for operational
units
o J-Series Weapons
 Based on airspace/range requirements and concept of training
 Legacy Systems - B-52 Heavy Bomber, F-15E, F-16/A-10 and C2ISR
 UASs include Predator, Reaper and Global Hawk
o Issues include operations outside restricted airspace and FAA approval
 ACC/A3A Range Roadmap
o Focus on “DOC requirements”
o Future Challenges
 Frequency spectrum contention – bandwidth requirements
 Security
 Civil and military airspace deconfliction
 Development under airspace and around airfields
 Noise and air quality issues
 Longer range weapons
 Realistic urban terrain training
 Live-Virtual-Constructive connectivity
 Questions/Comments –
o More trust is needed between MAJCOMS to be able to fully incorporate roadmaps and
reduce territorial concerns.
o We need to think of encroachment for frequency management.
o ACC will hold an annual conference in March 2010 at Langley, and inputs are welcome
for new discussion topics.
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
22
4. AFMC Roadmap – Mr. Ball (HQ AFMC/A30)
 Status of effort to re-establish restricted airspace
o Needed to support AFRL’s requirement for UAS flight operations in Ohio
o AFRL requires a place to develop detection techniques for small UASs
o Test Environment/Range
 Near Term effort
 On-going at Camp Atterbury, IN
 Migrate to WPAFB Area B when local implementing instructions are approved
(2007 DoD-FAA MOA)
 Longer Term effort
 Year round facility within range of WPAFB based radar systems
 Targets and transportable sensor systems need to have line of sight to WPAFB
radar systems
 Convenient driving distance (1 hour) for daily commute for target set up and
extended testing with transportable systems
 No weapons employment
o The Challenge includes current FAA policy on UAS operations and securing suitable
airspace close to AFRL
o Existing Restricted Airspace near WPAFB includes Camp Perry, Camp Atterbury and
Jefferson Proving Grounds, however each has limitations in radar coverage and flying
area.
o Available MOAs include Brush Creek and Buckeye
o Potential UAS Launch/Recover Sites
o AFRL’s Timeframe to Achieve is within 3-5 years
 Needs Statement near completion
 Questions/Comments
o How much use, and for what duration? Looking at 3-5 flights per day, ongoing.
o To what altitude? Up to 10,000 MSL
5. AMC Roadmap – Mr. Gravelle (HQ AMC/A3AA)
 Special Use Airspace
o Units asked to review existing low level routes, AR tracks, etc., to determine whether
there are current requirements as well as whether new airspace could offer fuel savings
 High Speed Exemption
o In order to train as we fight, there is a need to practice high speed (250-350 knots)
ingress/egress below 10,000’ MSL for AMC aircraft
o Under discussion between various wings and AMC HQ for several years
o McChord C-17s pushed package up to AMC/A3 who concurred and sent to AFFSA
o AFFSA waiver approved only for AMC-owned aircraft, flown by AMC pilots
o AMC will share waiver package with other MAJCOMs (including ANG and AFREC) so
they can process AFFSA waiver request if needed
o Question – what environmental studies are needed (AFFSA waiver says “comply with
any required environmental impact assessment requirements”)?
 The FAA has no environmental requirement for speed variations
 McChord environmental office is investigating
 AMC has no UAS nor future plans to obtain them
o However, UAS are being bedded down at AMC bases (Grand Forks, Pope in future)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
23
6. Issues – FAA/Military – Brig General Rice
 UAS
o The philosophy at the FAA relative to UAS issues is how to achieve levels of safety
before granting approvals for operations
o General Rice has the “feeling” that the FAA believes the military is the agency to help
the FAA to achieve
o The bulk of UAS training will be accomplished through the ANG
o Since the Air Force intends to accomplish UAS training strictly within Restricted
Airspace, there is and will continue to be a “double standard” for resolving operational
issues
 AMC issue - flying C-17s above 250Kts
o Rather than fight the standards guys over the issue of waivers for AMC versus, ACC and
ANG, lets use the template and submit separate waiver requests
7. ANG Roadmap – Mr. Welch (NGB/A3A)
 More Airspace, more ranges and more airspace actions than any other MAJCOM or DoD
component.
 ANG Strategic Plan 2008
o “Our Air Force is in the midst of modernizing and recapitalizing every major air, space
and cyberspace mission area and the Air Guard must and will be a part of that. We will
remain embedded in those mission areas that allow us to bring capabilities to the
Governors while maintaining relevance as a warfighting component to the Air Force.”
 ANG Airspace and Ranges
o Joint Training
 Joint training opportunities at numerous CRTCs and Air Guard ranges
 JFCOM JNTC Certification
 Main emphasis is for data-link ranges, primarily coming from JFCOM funding.
 Resourcing Challenges
 Biggest challenges in funding joint activities is parochialism rules for money and
manpower
o ANG DMO/Data-Link Ranges
 The ANG Range community will link via T-1 lines to the regional Combat Readiness
Training Centers (CRTC). The CRTCs will link to the ANG Distributed Training
Operations Center (DTOC) via DS-3 lines. The DTOC will link to other DMO
Participants via the JTEN, DMON, and ARCNet.
 Homeland Defense Assets will link through the DTOC to the Ranges and CRTCs via
the ARCNet through the DTOC.
o Training transformation, the warfighting cycle and the relevant Range
 Current airspace/range structure is designed to meet Viet Nam era training
requirements
 Today technological advances has changed the training challenge
o Irregular Warfare includes IED, UAS/RC-26 (unmanned and manned recce) and urban
ops
 A lot of current urban ops is conducted dry over urban centers
 Four types of Airspace for Urban Ops
 Existing Special Use Airspace
 Stationary ALTRV
 Temporary ATCAA
 Temporary MOA
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
24
o



Bottom Line
 Developing new airspace to react to quickly shifting operation requirements is a long
process.
 To meet warfighter’s urgent training requirements, original solutions must sometimes
be pursued.
 Success depends on your relationship with local FAA agencies.
 Continued success depends on your public outreach program.
 Recent incident on 9/11/09 highlighted importance to properly coordinate with
law enforcement and other agencies.
Partnership for Peace
o Building Partnership Capability/Capacity (BPC)
o “Sister Cities”
o Partnerships for Peace
o Michigan-Latvia connection
 Grayling Range JTACs training
 Support of other FWP nations
o EPAF/NATO participation in PCDS
 Version 6 is due to be released shortly, which will include embedded EW capability.
Domestic Operations
o State Missions/ANG Strategic Plan
o Homeland Defense/Emergency Response Support
 Katrina terrorist action
 Training Venues – Volk and Smoky Hill
o Local/State/Federal law enforcement
o Leverage training architecture for real world
Source documents are available on the ANG A3A portal site
8. State Priorities
 Michigan – Colonel Furland
o Grayling Range - airspace expansion around R-4201A/B
 New MOA and restricted area
 10nm CAS wheel
 10nm run-in for medium altitude LASER/GPS deliveries
o Two new urban CAS MOAs under the Pike West MOA
 Support robust training inside an existing ACMI range
o Two connecting IR “Bridges”
 Pike West MOA to R-4201A/B
 Allow smooth flow throughout the CRTC complex
o Adjust ATCAAs to enhance traffic flow into Toronto Center Airspace over the Steelhead
ATCAA, as well as open up additional maneuver ATCAA airspace in the central and
eastern section of the Huron Airspace Complex.
o Questions??
 Is this a concept or a proposal? It is a concept at this point.
 Concern over attempt to have a MOA down to 100’ over the town of Alpena
 Other concern that an existing FAA Airway above the current MOA (FL270 and
above) is currently highly utilized
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
25





Minnesota – Lt. Colonel Jackson
o Camp Ripley ALTRV
 In conjunction with R-4301, allows F-16 CAS w/BDU-33 utilizing 34 ID JTACs
 Expanding urban target suite (CACTF FY08)
 Future requests for ATCAA and MOA
o Future ATCAA and MOA for C-130 NVG training, JPADS, Shadow
Missouri – Colonel Kelk
o BRAC realigned F-15s
o Top three Airspace/Range priorities
 Proposed Wind Generating Electrical Facility (WGEF) affecting Cannon MOA
 Expansion of Cannon Range Complex
 Lindbergh MOA
North Dakota – Lt Colonel Eckmann
o Base Eight Predator Aircraft and Maintenance at Grand Forks AFB (ACC)
o Establish the second Global Hawk Main Operating Base at Grand Forks AFB (ACC) Base six to eight aircraft and maintenance at Grand Forks AFB
o US Customs and Border Protection will operate an MQ-9 out of Grand Forks AFB.
o Top Three Airspace/Range Priorities
 UAS Airspace
 MOAs for JCA
 Maintaining Tanker tracks for KC-X at Grand Forks AFB
o Proposed Initiatives - Restricted Airspace for 178RS UAS continuation training
o Training space for Joint Cargo Aircraft mission
o Other Issues of Concern - Competing interest for limited Airspace in northeast North
Dakota
o Current airspace proposal will be returned for additional changes
Ohio – Colonel Wallace
o GREAT support from Indianapolis Center.
o They have 14 jets – training Dutch students
o On the radar – to bring in Singapore jets for a 2-3 year agreement, with potential
extensions to 2015
o Great local MOAs
o Do not have the need to go to gunnery ranges as much as before
o They use bridges, factories, communities as simulated targets
o The Netherlands also brings JTACs for training.
o Awareness of AFRL is trying to do with UAS operations
o Mansfield – converting to the C-27
o Toledo is robusting – some talk of Block 40s in the future.
o Would like to see ability of SADL and Link 16 to talk to each other.
o No airspace proposals currently
Wisconsin – Colonel Romuald
o Top three airspace/range priorities
 IAW with FAA Special Use Airspace (SUA) Review (Jun 08), coordinating
expansion of current Volk Field Airspace Complex (VFAC) to meet future missions
and aircraft
 COAs for use of UAS in the VFAC
 Enhancement of range complex to support evolving training requirements – urban
CAS, future weapons and threat emitters (acquiring Joint Threat Emitters and P-5
pods with live monitoring capability)
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
26
o




Madison and Buckley were notified earlier this year of potential conversion to Block 40
aircraft w/SEAD mission, which will drive requirement for improved emitters.
Indiana – Colonel Soldner
o Mascatatuck site
 An Army initiative has POM’d the Site for 100 million dollars and could eventually
be up to 150 million a year
 The site will offer great joint training opportunities
 After looking at pros and cons, they were looking at designing “adaptive airspace”,
but now are looking at developing temporary airspace.
 He suggested units use Google Earth as a starting point to develop airspace to take
advantage of the graphics capability.
 Proposing temporary MOAs that can be used jointly or separately.
 Developed with close coordination of Indianapolis Center.
o Also propose the CAMCCO ATCAA over the MOAs to support primarily surveillance
and targeting.
o Temporary MOAS being developed using GARS.
o Point of contact on the airspace proposal
 Lt Colonel Ken Stone
o COMMENT: This proposal is still at the conceptual stage, still working on how to have
a better way ahead for the UAS issues.
o Discussion: A temporary MOA request from the FAA of 120 days is optimistic – get it
in as soon as possible
Iowa – Colonel Maly
o No changes from last year
o Success story with using an ALTRV right over the city of Des Moines at altitudes
10,000’ to 17,000’ MSL to practice Urban CAS.
o The Fort Dodge Air Control Squadron provides excellent support.
o They would like to continue to use temporary MOAs
New Mexico – Brig Gen Bledsoe
o No ongoing initiatives
Texas – Captain Hoopes
o The 149th Fighter Wing has a concept for the South Texas Joint Training Center.
 Joint effort with the Army and Navy
o Current airspace is unchanged sense the early 1970s
9. Action Item Recap – Mr. Pierce
 New ACTION ITEM - An evaluation of the collective impact of wind turbines on groundbased radars is needed. Challenge is what agency would be the OPR for such analysis. (For
now, AF/A3O-AR will take the action item to track.)
 New ACTION ITEM – Why is there a requirement for observers within controlled airspace –
what is the basis for the requirement? OPR is the FAA Central Service Area Operations
Support Group.
NOTE: Subsequent to the CSA Exec ARC meeting, Mr. Rizzo provided this answer:
14 CFR Part 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace, has no exclusionary
airspace provision. The requirement is only to establish and maintain
two-way radio communication with the servicing ATC facility. A
clearance to operate inside Class D is not required as it is in Class B
airspace, for example. Since Class D is not considered exclusionary from
an Air Traffic perspective, there may be nonparticipating traffic that
becomes a factor during UAS flight operations, and Part 91 "see-andAir Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
27
avoid" mitigations must be implemented. These mitigations are typically
met by ground observers when it comes to operations under the FAA-DoD
MOU governing COA's for non-joint use Class D airspace.
The question as to why the observer cannot perform duties from the ATCT
can be answered by the volume of Class D airspace involved and the
UAPO-issued line-of-sight distance limitations per airframe. In the case
of the Cannon Class D COA for Predators that distance is 2 miles
laterally and/or 3000' vertically. Since Cannon AFB's Class D extends 6
miles from the center point, the majority of Cannon's Class D lies beyond
what an observer located in the ATCT could cover. This distance
limitation drives the requirement for ground observers positioned outside
the ATCT to cover UAS operations at outer portions of Cannon's Class D.
G. Wrap up & Adjourn - Colonel Neumann and Brig General Soileau
Colonel Neumann mentioned the next step in the process is the National meeting at Andrews AFB in
December. Brig General Soileau thanked all for attending and taking part in a very productive
meeting. After commenting on the F-35 tour availability during the afternoon, Colonel Neumann
adjourned the meeting at 1145 hours.
APPROVED
BEN SOILEAU, Brigadier General, USAF
HQ Louisiana Air National Guard Chief of Staff
Co-Chairman, Southern/Southwest Region
Airspace/Range Council
GUNTHER H. NEUMANN, Colonel, USAF
Joint Forces Headquarters, WI/J3
Co-Chairman, Central-Great Lakes Region
Airspace/Range Council
EDWARD J. CHUPEIN, Colonel, USAF
Deputy Director for Ranges and Airspace
Air Force Directorate of Operations and Training
Co-Chairman, Central Service Area
Airspace/Range Executive Council
Attachments:
1. Agenda
2. List of Attendees
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
28
AGENDA
16 September
Time
Topic
Speaker
0800
Welcoming Remarks, Objectives and Introductions
Brig Gen Soileau
Colonel Neumann
Lt Col Sigley
0820
National Issues
Brig Gen Rice
0900
Air Staff Initiatives
Lt Col Sigley; Major Paton
1000
BREAK
1030
Action Item Status
Mr. Weppner
1100
Topics of Interest
- Airspace Development
- NEXTGEN
- F-35 Update
Lt Col Steinbicker
Major Marentette
Major Lippert
1145
Recap
1155
FAA Participation – ROE
1200 - 1330
LUNCH
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 1-1
16 September
Time
Topic
Speaker
1330
Opening Remarks
Brig Gen Soileau
Colonel Neumann
1340
Welcome and FAA Perspective
Mr. Lowe
1345
National Perspectives
Brig Gen Rice
1400
FAA Perspectives
- DTO Perspectives
- Status – Airspace Actions
- MADE Update
- ERAM
- Special Activity Airspace
Maj Flanders
Mr. Lowe
Lt Col Harper; Maj Flanders
Mr. Perkins
Ms. Smith
Mr. Fulmer
1515
BREAK
1545
UAS Operations
- MAJCOM and State Plans – Airspace; CONOPS
- (UAS CONEMP)
Lt Col Sigley; Lt Col Militello
Texas
New Mexico
North Dakota
Others
1630
Action Item Recap
Mr. Pierce
1645
Wrap-up
Brig Gen Soileau
Colonel Neumann
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 1-2
Time
Topic
0800
Opening Remarks
0810
Strategic Visions – Discussion
17 September
Regional Roadmaps – New Template
ACC
AFMC
AMC
ANG
State Priorities
Speaker
Brig Gen Soileau
Colonel Neumann
Brig Gen Soileau;
Colonel Neumann
Mr. Wilson
Mr. Garrett
Mr. Ball
Mr. Gravelle
Mr. Welch
State Representatives
0930
BREAK
1000
Issues, Concerns, Solutions – Roundtable Discussion
Co-Chairs
1130
Action Item Recap
Mr. Pierce
1145
Wrap up
Brig Gen Soileau
Colonel Neumann
Lt Col Sigley
NOTE: Afternoon Tour of Lockheed-Martin F-35 Facilities
Details TBD
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 1-3
ATTENDEES
Lt Col George Bacik
CGL ARC - Exec Assistant
DSN: 871-1502
Comm: (608) 427-1502
Cell:
E-mail: george.bacik@ang.af.mil
Mr. Don Ball
AFMC/A3O
4375 Chidlaw Road, Ste S-143
WPAFB, OH 45433-
DSN: 787-5834
Comm: (937) 257-5834
Cell: (513) 827-0803
E-mail: don.ball@wpafb.af.mil
Brig Gen Jay Bledsoe
NMANG/CoS
2251 Air Guard Rd. SE
Albuquerque, NM 87117-5875
DSN: 263-9721
Comm: (505) 853-9721
Cell: (505) 463-4854
E-mail: john.bledsoe@ang.af.mil
Mr. Mark Brown
Concept Solutions / DINS
11490 Commerce Park Dr. Ste 520
Reston, VA 20191-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 889-8448
Cell:
E-mail: mark.brown@concept-solutions.com
Colonel Wayne Canipe
HQ ACC/A3A
205 Dodd Blvd.
Langley AFB, VA 23665-2789
DSN: 574-4661
Comm: (757) 764-4661
Cell:
E-mail: wayne.canipe@langley.af.mil
Major David Compton
181 AS
500 Hensley Ave, Carswell Field
Fort Worth, TX 76127-4175
DSN:
Comm: (817) 825-3293
Cell:
E-mail: david.compton@ang.af.mil
Lt Col Dean Eckmann
NDANG
1400 32nd Ave North
Fargo, ND 58102-
DSN: 362-8597
Comm: (701) 451-2597
Cell:
E-mail: dean.eckmann@ang.af.mil
Major Jamie Flanders
AFREP, CSA, ASW-910
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Ft Worth, TX 76137-
DSN: 477-2910
Comm: (817) 222-5910
Cell: (682) 472-2185
E-mail: jamie.flanders@faa.gov
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-4
ATTENDEES
Mr. Dean Fulmer
FAA - National SAA Project Manager
512 Division St
Farmington, MN 55024-
DSN:
Comm:
Cell: (763) 229-0734
E-mail: dean.fulmer@faa.gov
Colonel Don Furland
JFHQ-MI/DO
3411 N. Martin Luther King Jr.
Lansing, MI 48906-2834
DSN:
Comm: (269) 375-8674
Cell: (269) 330-1449
E-mail: donald.furland@mibatt.ang.af.mil or
d.furland@att.net
Mr. Gerald Garrett
HQ ACC / A3AA
205 Dodd Blvd., Suite 101
Langley AFB, VA 23665-2789
DSN: 574-3169
Comm: (757) 764-3169
Cell: (757) 876-5023
E-mail: gerald.garrett@langley.af.mil
Mr. Jeffrey Golliver
HQ AFSOC / A3OUI
210 Hartson St.
Hurlburt Field, FL 32544-5434
DSN: 579-4064
Comm: (850) 884-4064
Cell: (850) 902-7041
E-mail: jeffrey.golliver@hurlburt.af.mil
Mr. Timothy Gravelle
HQ AMC/A3AA
402 Scott Drive, Unit 3A1
Scott AFB, IL 62225-5302
DSN: 779-4557
Comm: (618) 229-4557
Cell:
E-mail: timothy.gravelle@scott.af.mil
Lt Col Tony Harper
AFREP, CSA, ASW-910
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Ft Worth, TX 76137-
DSN: 477-5913
Comm: (817) 222-5913
Cell:
E-mail: tony.harper@faa.gov
MSG Murphy Ho Chee
FAA-CSA (DAR)
DSN:
Comm: (817) 222-5920
Cell: (703) 946-3079
E-mail: murphy.hochee@faa.gov
ACC Andrew Hollie
DSN: 477-2930
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-5
ATTENDEES
FAA-CSA (NAVREP)
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Ft Worth, TX 76137-0930
Comm: (817) 222-5930
Cell: (817) 851-3653
E-mail: andrew.hollie@faa.gov
Captain Eric Hoopes
149 FW / Det 1 (Range)
117 Hensley St., Suite 1
Lackland AFB, TX 78236-
DSN: 945-7648/7797
Comm: (210) 925-7648
Cell: (210) 332-8224
E-mail: eric.hoopes@txkell.ang.af.mil
Lt Col Brad Jackson
148th FW
4611 Phantom Drive
Duluth, MN 55811-
DSN: 825-7264
Comm: (218) 788-7264
Cell:
E-mail: bradley.jackson@mndulu.ang.af.mil
Mr. Landon Jones
NGB/A3AA
1411 Jefferson Davis Hwy
Arlington, VA 22202-3233
DSN: 327-0219
Comm: (703) 607-0219
Cell: (571) 228-3060
E-mail: landon.jones@ang.af.mil
Colonel Jon Kelk
MO ANG NGMO-AIR-AO
DSN: 824-6310
Comm: (314) 527-6310
Cell: (314) 378-9398
E-mail: jon.kelk@mostlo.ang.af.mil
Colonel Steve Konie
IL ANG A3/DO
DSN: 555-3695
Comm: (217) 761-3695
Cell: (217) 502-0884
E-mail: steven.konie@ang.af.mil
Mr. Ron Laster
FAA-CSA Operations Support Group - ERAM
2601 Meacham Blvd
Ft Worth, TX
DSN:
Comm: (817) 321-7741
Cell: (817) 994-4148
E-mail: ron.ctr.laster@faa.gov
Lt Col Russ Limke
114 OSF
1201 W. Algonquin Ave.
Sioux Falls, IA 57140-
DSN: 798-7418
Comm: (605) 988-5418
Cell: (605) 261-8565
E-mail: russell.limke@sdsiou.ang.af.mil
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-6
ATTENDEES
Major Stephen Lippert
NGB/A7AM
3500 Fetchet Ave
Andrews AFB, MD 20762-
DSN: 278-8167
Comm: (301) 836-8167
Cell: (301) 283-8508
E-mail: stephen.lippert@ang.af.mil
Mr. Rob Lowe
DSN:
Director, Tactical Operations Central Svc Area (ATO-R) Comm: (817) 222-5589
2601 Meachum Blvd.
Cell: (940) 372-1940
Ft. Worth, TX 76137E-mail: rob.lowe@faa.gov
Colonel Mark Maly
IA JFHQ/DO
7105 NW 70th Ave
Johnston, IA 50131-
DSN: 431-4296
Comm: (515) 252-4296
Cell: (515) 991-4931
E-mail: mark.maly@ang.af.mil
Mr. Brad Marcum
HQ AETC/A3OR
1 F Street, Suite 2
Randolph AFB, TX 78150-
DSN: 487-8253
Comm: (210) 652-8253
Cell: (210) 867-5174
E-mail: brad.marcum2@randolph.af.mil
Major Lenore Marentette
AF/A3O-AA
1480 AF Pentaqon
Washington, DC 20331-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 588-0638
Cell:
E-mail: lenore.marentette@pentagon.af.mil
Lt Col Joseph Matchette
AFRC/A3VS
155 Richard Ray Blvd., Bldg 210
Robins AFB, GA 31098-
DSN: 497-0531
Comm: (475) 327-0531
Cell: (602) 312-7373
E-mail: joseph.matchette@afrc.af.mil
Mr. Roger McGrath
DSN:
FAA - Central Service Area - Operation Support Group Comm: (817) 321-7735
2601 Meachum Blvd.
Cell: (847) 477-6038
Ft. Worth, TX 76137E-mail: roger.mcgrath@faa.gov
Lt Col Anthony Militello
Air Force UAS Airspace Integration
800 Independence Ave. SW, Ste 420E
DSN: 325-6272
Comm: (202) 267-9428
Cell:
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-7
ATTENDEES
Washington, DC 20591-
E-mail: anthony.l.militello@faa.gov or
anthony.militello@pentagon.af.mil
Mr. Joseph Miller
AFLOA JACE
DSN: 2109252461
Comm: (210) 792-3239
Cell:
E-mail: joseph.miller@lackland.af.mil
Brig Gen Rick Mitchell
NAEC Exec Asst; JFH-CT/COS
100 Nicholson Rd.
E. Granby, CT 06026-9309
DSN: 220-2332
Comm: (860) 292-2332
Cell: (603) 320-1407
E-mail: richard.mitchell@ang.af.mil
Colonel Ken Nereson
149 FW/CC
110 Hensley St., Suite 1
Lackland AFB, TX 78236-
DSN: 945-3510
Comm: (510) 925-3510
Cell: (210) 602-1915
E-mail: kenneth.nereson@txkell.ang.af.mil
Colonel Gunther Neumann
JFHQ-WI/J3
2400 Wright St.
Madison, WI 53708-8111
DSN: 724-3530
Comm: (608) 242-3530
Cell: (608) 516-8642
E-mail: gunther.h.neumann@ng.army.mil
Major Brad Paton
HQ AF - A3O-ARA
1840 Nash St., Ste C-100
Arlington, VA 22209-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 588-2017
Cell:
E-mail: bradley.paton@pentagon.af.mil
Mr. Jim Perkins
HQ FAA / AJR-33 (MADE)
13600 EDS Drive, Rm 1020
Herndon, VA 20171-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 326-3734
Cell: (202) 450-0136
E-mail: jim.perkins@faa.gov
Mr. Richard Pierce
QinetiQ-NA
106 Bid A Wee Court
Panama City Beach, FL 32413-2783
DSN:
Comm: (850) 230-9411
Cell: (850) 387-5960
E-mail: rpierce211@comcast.net
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-8
ATTENDEES
Dr. Thomas Rennie
Air Force Regional Environmental Office
525 S. Griffin St., Suite 505
Dallas, TX 75202-
DSN:
Comm: (214) 767-4678
Cell: (469) 236-5433
E-mail: thomas.rennie@brooks.af.mil
Brig Gen L. Scott Rice
JFHQ MA ANG / AAG
50 Maple Street
Milford, MA 01757-3604
DSN: 256-7485
Comm: (508) 233-7485
Cell: (413) 627-0821
E-mail: leon.rice@mabarn.ang.af.mil
Mr. Michael Rizzo
FAA - CSA ATREP
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76193-0910
DSN:
Comm: (817) 321-7733
Cell:
E-mail: michael.rizzo@faa.gov
Mr. Tony Roetzel
FAA-CSA
2601 Meacham Blvd
Ft Worth, TX 76193-
DSN:
Comm: (817) 321-7700
Cell:
E-mail: tony.roetzel@faa.gov
Lt Col Shannon Rogers
147 RW/XP
DSN:
Comm: (281) 929-2168
Cell: (281) 743-3004
E-mail: shannon.rogers.1@ang.af.mil
Colonel Dave Romuald
WI JFHQ
2400 Wright St.
Madison, WI 53704-2572
DSN:
Comm:
Cell: (608) 469-9004
E-mail: david.romuald@wimadi.ang.af.mil
Lt Col Glenn Sigley
AF/A3O-AA Senior AFREP
800 Independence Ave sW
Washington, DC 20591-
DSN: 325-6270
Comm: (202) 267-9427
Cell: (571) 214-0103
E-mail: glenn.sigley@pentagon.af.mil
Lt Col Kirk Simmons
Savannah CRTC / OG
1401 Robert B. Miller Jr. Dr.
Garden City, GA 31418-7299
DSN: 860-3303
Comm: (912) 963-3303
Cell: (912) 398-7410
E-mail: kirk.simmons@gacrtc.ang.af.mil or
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-9
ATTENDEES
kirk31324@yahoo.com
Brig Gen Ben Soileau
LAANG/CoS
400 Russell Ave. - Box 27
New Orleans, LA 70143-
DSN: 457-8601
Comm: (504) 391-8600
Cell: (337) 831-3509
E-mail: ben.soileau@ang.af.mil
Col Jeff Soldner
122FW
3005 Ferguson Rd.
Fort Wayne, IAP, IN 46809-
DSN: 778-3200
Comm: (260) 478-3200
Cell: (260) 403-1999
E-mail: jeffrey.soldner@inftwa.ang.af.mil
CDR Todd Templeton
NAVREP (ASW-930), CSA
2601 Meachum Blvd.
Ft Worth, TX 76137-0930
DSN: 477-2931
Comm: (817) 222-5931
Cell: (817) 851-3258
E-mail: todd.templeton@faa.gov
Ms. Nan Terry
FAA - CSA - Environmental Specialist
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76137-
DSN:
Comm: (817) 321-7736
Cell:
E-mail: nan.l.terry@faa.gov
Colonel Craig Wallace
178 FW/CV
801 "A" Avenue
Springfield-Beckley MAP, OH 45502
DSN: 346-2155
Comm: (937) 327-2155
Cell: (937) 605-4298
E-mail: craig.wallace@ang.af.mil
Mr. Patrick Welch
NGB/A3A
1411 Jefferson Davis Hwy
Arlington, VA 22202-3231
DSN: 327-2114
Comm: (703) 607-2114
Cell:
E-mail: pat.welch@ang.af.mil
Mr. Michael Weppner
QinetiQ North America
6921 Tred Avon Place
Gainesville, VA 20155-3150
DSN:
Comm: (703) 599-8827
Cell: (703) 282-8246
E-mail: mike.weppner@qinetiq-na.com
Mr. G. Gary Westfal
DSN: 579-4192
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-10
ATTENDEES
HQ AFSOC/A3VO
100 Bartley Street, Suite 153W
Hurlburt Field, FL
Comm: (850) 884-4192
Cell: (850) 582-4469
E-mail: george.westfal@hurlburt.af.mil
AC1 Victoria Williams
DoD NOTAM Office
13600 EDS Dr., Ste 100
Herndon, VA 20171-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 925-3219
Cell:
E-mail: victoria.m.williams@navy.mil
Mr. James Wilson
QinetiQ North America
7329 Laurel Creek Ct
Springfield, VA 22150-
DSN:
Comm: (703) 455-5116
Cell: (703) 867-4376
E-mail: jamesr.wilson@cox.net
Mr. Joe Yadouga
FAA Central Service Area
3501 Meacham Blvd
Ft. Worth, TX 76137-
DSN:
Comm: (817) 321-7734
Cell:
E-mail: joe.yadouga@faa.gov
Air Force Central Service Area Airspace/Range Exec Council – 16-17 Sep 2009
Attachment 2-11