|
United States Pilots Association |
Information has come to USPA through the New Mexico Pilots Association from one of their members that TSA will soon be requiring criminal background checks for GA pilots operating at airports served by airlines. Following is the initial email received Wednesday, February 25, followed by an email from NMPA President Bob Worthington received today.
Also, at a meeting of the Ozarks Chapter, MPA, tonight, the President of the Boone County Pilots Association of Harrison, Arkansas, said a TSA official would be speaking to their group next Thursday evening, March 5, about this issue and its effect on the Harrison Airport, and invited all interested parties to attend. I plan to do that.
In the meantime, although many pilots are in disbelief, I forward this information so that you may investigate for yourself.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
NOTICE TO NMPA MEMBERS FROM MEMBER MARC COAN
Date: February 25, 2009
To: All General Aviation Pilots
Subject: TSA to require criminal background checks for GA pilots
Dear Fellow Pilot,
This is a sad day! Just when you thought TSA’s proposed Large Aircraft Security Program was about the worst thing that could happen to General Aviation, a new, possibly far more serious threat has arisen.
Unconfirmed reports are beginning to surface of a “classified” TSA Security Directive which is applicable to all 450+ airports served by an airline flying aircraft with more than 10 seats. It requires the airport to develop a security plan to restrict access to all operations areas of the airport to only those people who have passed a criminal background check, received a security clearance, and been issued an airport security badge. (The same badge airline and airport operations personnel would be issued at that airport.)
This applies to ALL “behind the fence” areas, even if the GA facilities are located on the other side of the airport from the airline terminal. Those persons without a badge, including visiting GA pilots and their passengers, must be escorted to/from their aircraft by someone with a badge.
The fee to obtain a security clearance and badge is typically around $175. Anyone with a felony conviction in the past 10 years will not be issued a badge, nor will anyone on the TSA’s secret “do not fly” list. And, even if you’ve been issued a badge at one airport, it only works at that single airport: There is no “universal” TSA badge planned!
The directive applies not only to the airports served by MAJOR airlines, but ALL 450+ airline airports, including most of the 105 small airports on this list: http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/rural/proximity.pdf, which receive subsidized service by small commuter airlines. We’re talking about places like Great Bend, KS; Clovis, NM; Alamosa, CO; Grand Island, NE, and dozens more that receive only 2 or 3 commuter airline flights per day in a Beech 1900.
Unlike the Large Aircraft Security Program, this new 14-page Security Directive is not available for public viewing or comment. Not even AOPA, USPA, EAA, NBAA, etc. have been allowed to view it. All AOPA says is, “Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, the TSA is proceeding with this program. While the full details of the program are classified, it will essentially require all persons with access to the secure portion of the airport have a TSA approved airport access badge.”
The directive is supposedly effective April 30.
Here are some news articles about Coastal Carolina Regional Airport and how its complying with the directive:
http://www.enctoday.com/news/airport_44044_nbsj__article.html/new_authority.html
http://www.enctoday.com/news/security_44155_nbsj__article.html/coastal_airport.html
Pilots there are upset, but 90 of the 170 regular users of the airport have already applied for their badges.
There are just so many reasons to oppose this directive. Here are four…let me know if you think of others:
1. It will be a massive inconvenience. Think about it: If you are visiting even a tiny airline airport, at any time of day, you won’t be able to use the self-serve fueling station, won’t be able to drive your rental car out to plane to get your bags, and won’t be able to wander over and look at that cool airplane with the “For Sale” banner you saw on the ramp. Your needs are not important.
2. It means that, even though you are a federally-licensed pilot carrying both a pilot’s license and the required photo ID, you are ASSUMED to be a security threat to the country that issued you the license.
3. It will be an enormous burden on FBOs, and will cause a further reduction in their business (during the middle of an economic depression, at least in aviation). Many pilots will choose to avoid airline airports they used to fly to. (I will no longer stop for fuel at one of my favorite airports.) And, when we do use those airports, an FBO employee will have to drop what they’re doing to meet us and play escort service. (I guess a side benefit is we might get better service from small-town FBOs, but many of those operators only have 2-3 people working at a time, if that. Is TSA going to compensate FBOs so they can hire more staff? Yeah, right!)
4. It will cause even more of an “us vs. them” attitude by GA pilots vs. the airlines. GA pilots will strongly resist adding airline service to airports that don’t already have it and many will call for the abolishment of the Essential Air Service program that enables their own small airport to have airline service.
Remember, this is coming on the heels of the TSA’s Large(?) Aircraft Security Program, which will require all private operators of aircraft bigger than a King Air 300 to have an airline-style security plan, including screening all their passengers against the “do not fly” list and inspecting their bags. All for a threat that has yet to be proved to exist.
I do not see how GA is a threat to this country when compared with trucks which can be rented by anyone from U-haul or Ryder. (Remember the first World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings? Those were trucks, not planes.) And, if GA pilots are such a great threat to this country, how come the government hasn’t even done such a simple thing as run all pilots through the “do not fly” list, revoking the licenses of those who are on it?
Folks, this may well be The Big One that requires thousands of us to fly our planes to Washington in protest. (Of course, we’ll have to take the FAA’s Washington ADIZ test first!) Hopefully, the actual "badge" directive is not as severe as the early reports are saying...perhaps not all airline airports are affected. But we just don't know because they aren't telling us!
If true, something has to be done, and it sounds like the only thing we can do is try to get the attention of Congress, which controls the purse strings of TSA. About the only compromise I can think of is a universal pilot badge that costs $50 and is good at ALL airline airports. But TSA is not proposing such a thing, and they aren’t taking public comments on their proposal.
Please forward this message to every GA pilot you know; don’t delay! And if you hear any further news, or learn what YOUR airport is being forced to do to comply, please let me know so I can alert others.
Sincerely,
Marc C. Coan,
marc@skymachines.com
INFORMATION FOR NMPA MEMBERS
Wednesday morning NMPA sent, via our email listing, members a request from Marc Coan regarding a directive from the Transportation Security Administration requiring background checks on people wanting access to some airports. The response to Marc’s comments were intense. They ranged from being outraged, to angry, to it can’t be true.
One reader suggested that the email was ill advised as it lacked facts and was promoting rumors and conjecture. I responded citing what was actually going on right now at some airports. Others asked, if this is true, why wasn’t I told? It was suggested that GA pilots try to set up some dialogue with TSA to resolve these concerns. One suggestion was to ask the FAA what is going on. I spent a good deal of yesterday either on my email or on the phone talking to pilots who read Coan’s message to GA pilots.
Like everyone else, I have my own opinions and because of the interest regarding this topic, I will make some comments. Also, based on the observations of some of the readers; I believe that many pilots really do not understand how our big brother, the Dept of Homeland Security (to which TSA belongs) operates. Therefore, I will begin my comments with a brief lesson on our government.
First though, let me proffer my bias in that I am neither a fan of the DHS nor many of its agencies. In too many ways it is an ineffectual, bloated bureaucratic organization, that too often is more concerned with its power base than its mission (which by the way is to protect the US against terrorism). Now before I am accused of either ignorance of national security issues or being unpatriotic let me present some of my background. I have experience in national security (I had a security clearance of Top Secret) and have been a law enforcement officer. As for being seen as lacking patriotism; I am a retired military officer who went willingly to war on the behalf of the US three different times. I also have a disability for wounds received in combat. Now on to Govt 101.
The DHS was created by Congress after 9/11 to establish a framework and federal organization to protect the US against terrorism and disasters. The DHS reports to Congress and to the president. It is coordinated (controlled?) by the White House Homeland Security Council. When DHS was created Congress allowed it to forgo the normal civil service and union rights such that any employee can be reassigned or fired, without reason, under the guise of national security. DHS is the third largest cabinet (with DOD being #1 and the VA being #2). We must give credit to DHS since the US has not had a terrorist attack since 9/11 (although all experts in this field say the US is not in a position of “if” one will happen again but “when” it will occur). On the other hand DHS also has the lowest level of job satisfaction of the 36 govt agencies as discovered in a 2006 govt job satisfaction survey.
So we have an agency that is pretty much controlled by the White House (i.e., the president) and lacking real oversight by Congress; after all, who wants to complain about how our country is overprotected. Now all you have to do to verify what I have just stated is to do what I did and conduct a web search on the internet looking at both the US Govt web sites and then non-federal web sites regarding national security. When some who read Coan’s email advocate a dialogue with TSA or DHS, I doubt if they have any interest in listening to anyone.
Here is another fact to really pay attention. As of today, the US population is 306 million people. The GA pilot population in the US is under 500,000 or we GA pilots represent less than 0.002 % of our citizens. Not a lot of voting power there. We certainly do not carry much weight on any issue. Much of what DHS does has been described by many as “feel good” activities which have very little to do with actually enhancing security.
But to the general public, which has scant knowledge of GA, it seems like our government is taking giant steps to protect us from terrorist attacks by small planes. Does anyone remember the photograph of the Cessna 150, in Florida, in which a suicidal student pilot tried to destroy a building (and himself) by crashing into it? It just stuck out of the building after the crash. Remember the New York City baseball player who had miscalculated the effect of winds in a turn and crashed into an apartment building? The plane just bounced off the exterior and dropped down to the street. Certainly there are other much more effective means to destroy people and property than via a small plane.
Look at some past DHS operations, which have been less than stellar. The first that comes to mind is President Bush heaping shovels of praise on the head of FEMA (which comes under DHS) when Katrina hit New Orleans. We all know how badly FEMA did then (and it continues to make a very expensive mess in the New Orleans area). Last year DHS decided that increased security would be seen by requiring all GA aircraft to electronically obtain permission from DHS before either leaving or entering the US. The wisdom behind this is that any terrorist lurking in my 182 when I depart the Bahamas for Fort Pierce in Florida will gladly put his or her name on the manifest submitted to DHS so he or she can be met by federal agents upon landing in Florida. Obviously, this “feel good” rule was not created by anyone with any knowledge of crossing the US borders in a GA plane. Many airports we use in the Bahamas, Mexico, or Canada do not have any computer capability. For those advocates of talking to DHS about this rule, look at reality. During its open period for feedback pilots gave every reason on the hardships for pilots and the absurd thinking that terrorists will email the DHS telling them when and where they will enter (or exit) the US. Did DHS listen? No, in spite of virtually every response, saying it’s a bad idea; DHS ignored it all and went ahead with it. What about the thinking behind treating all aircraft over 12,500 pounds as an airliner and forcing the pilots and owners to adhere to all the airliner security requirements?
The current security directive has not been understood or carried out with any degree of standardization at all. Its 1 April compliance date has been moved to 1 June. Read the two newspaper articles in Coan’s message and see what problems it will bring about. Some of my communication with readers of Coan’s message believe it not true. One pilot said if this is happening, why hasn’t my airport told me? Why don’t I know about it? I might state that is the way DHS/TSA operates. I have many friends around the country who are FAA employees. Many of them are not told about this or if they do know, are being told to not discuss this at all. Even the security form TSA is using has no agency identification on it.
Some pilots see these constraining regulations as a means for the federal government to destroy GA and get rid of it. The FAA and the administration (as well as the airlines) wanted to implement a user fee system, which would have been disastrous to those of us who fly small planes. Congress did not agree with a user fee. So this may simply be another way to achieve the same ends.
The sum total of this lengthy email is to make pilots aware of the fact that little by little, under the guise of national security, DHS/TSA are creating requirements that will make it harder and harder to operate our planes. Pilots may eventually see that flying is no longer fun but an expensive hardship that is becoming too difficult to justify.
What can be done? Start communicating with your elected officials about what DSA/TSA is doing and asking or demanding that they convince you of the necessity of all these rules. Put your elected representatives at both the state and federal levels on the defensive to justify the security risk that is being avoided by imposing all these restrictions on you. Essentially DHS/TSA is saying that regardless of who has previously deemed you not a security risk; their investigation is not valid and only DHS/TSA has the knowledge and ability to determine who is or is not a risk. This is the same government agency, which certifies airline pilots to be armed in the cockpit but to also say they can not be trusted to carry a jumbo tube of toothpaste on board their aircraft in their overnight bag.
Contact your elected representatives and complain loud and clear about what DHS/TSA is doing and ask why. Do not accept the government’s stock answer that it increases national security. Demand your representative explain how it does that. If we as GA pilots do not insist these absurd rules of DHS/TSA do more harm than good; GA in the US will soon go the way of so many other countries around the world.
To me it is very sad and infuriating to watch the country which gave birth to aviation; regulate small plane flying out of existence simply because of ignorant bureaucrats who have decided that my 182 and I are serious threats to our nation and must be severely controlled.
Bob Worthington President, NM Pilots Association
Vice President, US Pilots Association
In case you haven’t seen it, here is what AVwebFlash has to say about AOPA’s position on the TSA plan.
AOPA says it's working behind the scenes to mitigate the effects of a so-far secret plan by the Transportation Security Administration to require background checks and badging of general aviation pilots using airports served by airlines. AOPA says it's been aware of the proposal for some time and its lobbying efforts resulted in a 60-day delay (to June 1) for implementation while the TSA considers input from general aviation operators. It's hoped that security measures more in tune with GA operations and requirements will result. This latest security news, on top of a veritable blitz of attention on GA by the TSA has lit up blogs and forums and suffice to say there's not much support for the initiative.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
From USPA VP JC Zalog:
Columbia Flight Service is reporting the commission of AWOS weather at the Branson Airport (BBG) on 124.62.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
So that we might have it totally correct, we received this email direct from the Branson Airport:
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
Jan,
The AWOS frequency at the Branson Airport is 124.625.
Thanks,
Jeremy
Jeremy Berven, C.M.
Deputy Director of Operations
Branson Airport, LLC
110 W. Adams St., Ste 204
Branson, MO 65616
(417) 334-7813
This email was received by USPA President Steve Uslan—another “War Story” about the reaches of TSA (please see the recent USPA Email Newsletter on this subject). The sender’s name has been omitted to protect the innocent.
A co-worker of mine, a retired U.S. Marine, is the latest FAA employee to be denied renewal of ramp driving authorization. He presented his FAA ID and a Social Security card, but the SS card was laminated and not acceptable. He presented his birth certificate, but it was issued by a hospital and not a State, so it too was unacceptable. He presented his retired Marine ID, but it was also unacceptable. He does not have a passport, so he is going to have to go to Social Security and get a replacement card that is not laminated.
The form that all airports are apparently following at the direction of TSA, is a Form I-9(Rev. 02/02/09), and is most likely a TSA form. An FAA ID, or a NWS ID, or a military ID(active or retired) carries the same weight in value as a school ID card, or a Day-care or nursery school record.
I'm not making this up! I will scan a copy of this form and email to you if you want.
Someone needs to pull in the reigns on TSA before they ruin America.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
If you won’t be able to attend the USPA board meeting in Tyler, TX, Friday, March 13, please be sure to send a proxy with someone who will be attending, or email your proxy to me (email proxies accepted), so that we’re assured of having a quorum for the meeting. Of course, everybody is invited to attend the meeting.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
USPA
This email from John Boatright, FAASTeam Program Manager, is being sent to USPA members by USPA President Steve Uslan.
I am attaching a Bulletin relating to Cessna seat tracks. The seat tracks have been a problem for several years in that the holes "wallow out" and
the seat will slide when power is applied and cause an accident. According to this bulletin the numbers are starting to really increase.
Would each of you please make sure this information gets to any flight schools and/or pilots that may be operating these aircraft in your areas.
You might want to make provide it to any Maintenance Technicians that have opportunity to work on these aircraft as well.
One more thing...if you would please call me or email me information as to any action you take as to putting this information out, I would appreciate
it.
Thanks,
John
(See attached file: Cessna Seat TracksSAFO 09002.pdf)
John H. Boatright
FAASTeam Program Manager
LBB FSDO
(806) 740-3811
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/safo
A SAFO contains important safety information and may include recommended action. SAFO content should be especially valuable to air carriers in meeting their statutory duty to provide service with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest. Besides the specific action recommended in a SAFO, an alternative action may be as effective in addressing the safety issue named in the SAFO.
Subject: In-flight slippage of pilot and co-pilot seats on Cessna models 303, 336 and 337; and all legacy (pre-1986) single-engine Cessna models 150, 152, 170, 172, 175, 177, 180, 182, 185, 188, 190, 195, 205, 206, 207 and 210
Purpose: This SAFO is issued to remind inspectors, operators, owners and maintenance technicians of the mandatory requirement to comply with Airworthiness Directive (AD) 87-20-03 R2. This AD requires periodic inspections of the seat tracks, and repair or replacement of the tracks as necessary.
Background: Service Difficulty Reports (SDR) and accidents increased from nearly 2 per year (prior to 1996) to over 5 per year after 1996. The number of accidents statistically increased from 1 every 3 years (prior to 1996) to 1 every 20 weeks since 1996. In the past 20 years, 6 fatalities are known and 70 SDRs reported. These results indicate compliance to AD 87-20-03 R2 is not being accomplished for a significant number of airplanes.
Discussion: Full compliance to AD 87-20-03 R2 must be achieved.
Recommended Action: Recommend pilots and operators become familiar with the requirements and intervals of AD 87-20-03 R2 due to the significant operational safety concern it addresses. Also recommend pilots and operators confirm their maintenance provider’s knowledge and accomplishment of this AD to eliminate incidents and accidents due to in-flight seat slippage of pilot and co-pilot seats.
Questions: Contact Hieu Nguyen, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, by phone at (316) 946-4129 (phone) or by fax at (316) 946-4107 for more information.
Jan Hoynacki, Executive Director
United States Pilots Association
This past week I was listening to a talk radio AM station out of Lubbock, TX. A PSA came on advising that Homeland Security is now regulating privately owned watercraft throughout the country. This is an indication of what is to come for us in small planes.
We all know that Border Patrol, ICE (Customs & Immigration), DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency), and the U.S. Coast Guard protect our oceanic borders from terrorists and smugglers. What I was not aware of is the fact that HSA is now controlling watercraft operations on inland lakes and rivers. Did you know that if you find a good fishing spot under a bridge, you are forbidden to anchor there.
I can well imagine what HSA has planned for us who fly small planes in the future. Just take a look at what they are trying to do to charter and fractional operators with mandatory filing of passenger manifests a day in advance. For those of you who think I see the sky falling, wait until they come after us next. I foresee small rural airports fenced and guarded like Fort Knox. We will not be able to go out on Saturday mornings for the $100 breakfast. My dog will need a passport to cross a state line in my plane.
Folks, wake up and smell the roses. Michael Chertoff is gone (thank God and Pres. Obama), but I am sure his replacement will continue to come after us.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am really angry over the fact I have lost half of my retirement, forty per cent of my aircraft value, and all of my equity in my home in about six months. All of this is due to corruption and under regulation by our government. We need to let our elected officials know that we are Americans, too. We pay the taxes and support the country. I am all for security, but not the type the government is offering.
Somebody please tell me what a bass fisherman can do to enhance the terrorist cause. I suppose you pilots who operate floatplanes know you better not anchor in the vicinity of a bridge.
You still do not believe me? Try this one on. A pilot was hired to bring a Piper Pacer from the Bahamas to the Houston area of Texas. He filed a proper flight plan with ADCUS noted with the Bahamian officials. He departed to land at a major airport in South Florida. Upon landing he was directed to the Customs facility and was approached by the official. A major argument started when Customs advised they did not have his flight plan. Fort Lauderdale approach worked the flight right up to being switched to tower. Customs held (restrained) the pilot for four hours before releasing him. Several hours later the pilot received a call on his cell phone requesting he come back to Fort Lauderdale because the inspector had misplaced his paperwork. The pilot politely declined.
Or this. A Piper Chieftain with American registration was being flown by an American pilot from the interior of Mexico to clear customs in Laredo, TX. The plane was to proceed onward to a maintenance facility in Texas for avionics and airframe work. The pilot landed in Laredo and went to clear Customs. The inspector demanded an import permit for the airplane. The pilot advised he did not need one since the plane would be returned to Mexico after repairs. The inspector then said the pilot was forbidden to remain in the U.S. (he was a citizen) and he would have to return to Mexico at once. It was getting dark. The aircraft could not legally under U.S. FARs be flown at night. The pilot said he would not violate FAA regs and they could arrest him if they saw fit to do so. Eventually Customs tried to levy a $5,000 fine on the pilot who called the local FAA. Again I say, God help us if these are the idiots who are supposedly protecting us.
Last thought. Do you think terrorists need to hijack airliners to hurt us? Try this scenario. You are scheduled to depart on an airline flight from a busy airport (lets use Houston Hobby as an example). You dutifully get into the security lines with hundreds of other folks. The "gentleman" behind you is carrying a large backpack. As you approach the screener with your shoes in hand, the gentleman behind you detonates an explosive device. I ask this question. What protection does TSA/HSA offer until you actually go through the scanning equipment? The answer is none. But don't we all "feel good" because of the enhanced security?
Imagine how much bigger they can make this “do less” department if they get control of general aviation. Hiring a group of undereducated ruffians to enforce useless regulations solely to recruit more voters into dependence and loyalty to the government is ludicrous. Maybe we should advertise for TSA help in Mexico. Those folks know how to take care of business.
Steve Uslan, President
United States Pilots Association
The big event at the next USPA Fly-in and Directors' business meeting in Tyler, TX, on 12-15 March is the USPA and EAA Aviation Career Day on Saturday, 14 March. USPA needs volunteers to help make this work.
Starting at 9:30 am until noon USPA is presenting a program to the people of Tyler on careers in aviation. Ten USPA members will each give a 12 minute talk on various vocational careers in aviation, such as flying for the airlines or the military, fixing airplanes or managing airports, charter flying, or teaching flying. This is a big event and is backed by several resources in Tyler. First the Historic Aviation Museum on the Tyler Airport is opening its doors to the public for the presentation. It is providing, free, the auditorium space for us to hold the presentation. In the afternoon the Tyler EAA Chapter 972 will be hosting a Young Eagle flying program for all young people between the ages of 8-17 who attend our presentation and who want to fly.
This is where we need volunteers. The EAA Chapter will need volunteers to help fill out the release forms from the parents for their children to fly. The EAA pilots will have 10-14 planes available to fly which means we can fly up to 200 young people that afternoon. EAA also needs some assistance where the people will be boarding the airplanes on the parking space behind the museum. So USPA needs about 12 members to volunteer to help.
Two points for volunteers to consider. First, this is a major undertaking by USPA and will generate considerable publicity for our organization. In keeping with our educational goals and promoting general aviation we are doing just that and also providing a service to the citizens of Tyler. We hope that many USPA members will come to Tyler and volunteer to help this historic "first" for USPA.
Second, the Tyler fly-in and business meeting will not be just the Saturday work. On Thursday evening we will have the Aviation Museum open to us for a private, after-hours visitation. On Friday afternoon we will have the Zoo to visit (it is a large 85 acre natural habitat zoo) and early that evening we will have a catered supper at the Zoo. Saturday evening we will enjoy our traditional banquet in a very nice local restaurant with an interesting guest speaker.
Tyler, TX, is within 500 nm of most USPA members. That translates to less than a four hour flight. The hotel cost also includes a full complimentary breakfast, and the total cost to USPA members is only $80 for almost three days of fun and food. So please sign up today to attend the first USPA fly-in of the year and please volunteer your services for helping out at Aviation Career Day. To volunteer please email or call the USPA VP of Meetings, Bob Worthington, at rworthin@zianet.com or 575 522 6785.
Thanks,
Bob Worthington