0
Lolie

TSA's Large Aircraft Security Program Proposal

Recommended Posts

So I haven't been on dz.com in a couple years or so, but I thought this deserved a mention. Sorry if it's already been brought up; I did a search and didn't find anything.

I'm just going to cut and paste this snippet from this month's EAA SportAviation magazine (I think they said it quite well...)

Quote

EAAers Urged to Respond to TSA’s Ominous Proposal

As reported last month, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has proposed sweeping security rules for the operation of aircraft that weigh more than 12,500 pounds. The proposed regulation, titled the Large Aircraft Security Program, would require owners of those aircraft to obtain permission from TSA to operate their own personal aircraft every time they carry passengers. Additionally, all flight crews would be required to undergo fingerprinting and a background check, all passengers would have to be vetted against the government’s terrorist watch lists, and numerous security requirements would be imposed on airports serving these “large” aircraft. EAA adamantly opposes this regulation and urges all members to respond to TSA.

In early November, the TSA did extend the comment period on the proposal, as EAA and other aviation groups had requested. Instead of the original comment deadline of December 29, 2008, TSA extended the comment period until February 27, 2009. EAA had asked for 90-day extension, but was nonetheless pleased with TSA’s prompt action.

How to Submit a Comment

To comment – refer to Docket No. TSA-2008-0021, “Large Aircraft Security Program, Other Aircraft Operator Security Program, and Airport Operator Security Program.”

By Mail, In Person or Fax to the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington DC 20590-0001. Fax 202-493-2251.

To comment electronically – access the Federal eRulemaking portal at www.Regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

You can review all the public comments to the TSA security proposal at the docket site on www.Regulations.gov.



Many aircraft used for skydiving, for example Twin Otters, DC3s, Skyvans, etc, fall into this category, and the restrictions will apply to jumpers.
Please consider making a comment using one of the methods explained above.

-Miranda
you shall above all things be glad and young / For if you're young,whatever life you wear
it will become you;and if you are glad / whatever's living will yourself become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
everyone needs to reply to this if you ever want to jump out of a Casa, DC-3, Hercules, Caribou, whatever in this country again.

It will make it difficult to do so - and we already have a hard time getting aircraft for events. This will put the nail in the coffin for many large aircraft that are at least, sometimes accessible to the skydiving public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only a few CASAs, DC-3s, and other specialty aircraft would be affected; the popular Twin Otter jump aircraft and most other jump planes fall below the stated weight threshold. Still, USPA will forcefully object. Further information on the TSA’s proposal appears at http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2008/1009.shtm. The new comment deadline is February 27, 2009.

Randy Ottinger
Director of Government Relations
www.uspa.org

Read the USPA blog!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Only a few CASAs, DC-3s, and other specialty aircraft would be affected; the popular Twin Otter jump aircraft and most other jump planes fall below the stated weight threshold.



Ooh, my mistake; thanks so much for the clarification! Still, it's not the direction we want to see things moving, and I think it's important people make their voices heard. Thanks Randy; it's good to hear the USPA is taking a strong stand against the proposal.

-Miranda
you shall above all things be glad and young / For if you're young,whatever life you wear
it will become you;and if you are glad / whatever's living will yourself become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Only a few CASAs, DC-3s, and other specialty aircraft would be affected; the popular Twin Otter jump aircraft and most other jump planes fall below the stated weight threshold. Still, USPA will forcefully object. Further information on the TSA’s proposal appears at http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2008/1009.shtm. The new comment deadline is February 27, 2009.

Randy Ottinger
Director of Government Relations



I wrote in my response just the same. Thank you for taking a stance on this.

Also, might I suggest to you and to the mods to make stickeys on issues such as these? Having a constant update on things we can comment on, and stay aware of would be pretty helpful don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This needs to be on the front burner again. I just emailed it to 1300 of our customers, but we need people to write their representatives and such about this, as well as comment on the docket itself.
Stupid rules require OVERWHELMING responses from the general public.

Here's what I sent out, pass it on......
__________________________________________

Hey folks - something I wanted to ask all of you to consider and look at. As we all know, the TSA was formed after the 9/11 attacks to oversee transportation security and all that.

Now they want to implement a rule that will make it very difficult to skydive out of any larger aircraft, like Casa's, DC-3, Caribous, C-130's, anything over 12500lbs.

If this rule (Docket No. TSA-2008-0021) goes into effect, then every time we jump out of a larger aircraft in the USA, we would basically be required to go through the same security checks as you would for any charter or scheduled flight anywhere else in the USA.

That means, security screening, passenger security checks, matching names with 'no-fly lists' and so on. And we would have to do that for EVERY load, not just people in general or a Boogie in general.

We fly Twin Otters, which do not fall into that category, but if you ever want to jump from a specialty aircraft again in the USA, then I hope you will take the time to write and comment on this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) has a good lot of information with step by step instructions on how to comment on it. They even provide some information on some of the arguments to use. Basically this will make general aviation more difficult for a lot of people, it is unnecessary intrusion into our lives, and the gain is very little, given that general aviation has not been involved in any acts of terrorism, including 9/11 itself.

Go to AOPA's page http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/gasecurity/submit.html and follow the steps. At the bottom of that page are some other helpful links.

The good news is that the TSA is required to respond to all comments, so the more they get, the better our chances of NOT seeing this rule enacted.

Please write - it is important for the future of skydiving that we help stop 'stupid rules'

TK Hayes
DZO
Skydive City

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I also used congress.org to send comments to my reps/senators, etc. Not a bad idea either. Maybe we get more people pissed off about it if they see the local impact.
TK
--------------------------------------
Thank you for using Congress.org Mail System.

Message sent to the following recipients:
Senator Martinez
Senator Nelson
Representative Brown-Waite
Message text follows:

January 9, 2009

[recipient address was inserted here]


[recipient name was inserted here],

Docket No. TSA-2008-0021 from the TSA is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
that would require many of the 'security audits' performed in airports and
commercial flights to be implemented on General Aviation flights for
aircraft over 12500lbs.

This would require no-fly lists and such to be used for any flight on such
an aircraft and put an undue burden on an aspect of aviation that has
already been hit hard by the 9/11 aftermath of regulations.

I run a skydiving business in Zephyrhills, FL, and I regularly bring in
specialty aircraft for jump operations. These airplanes fly up to 20
loads a day when they are here and they fall under the weight of >12500lbs
defined in this new TSA rule.

With this rule, I would be required to scan no-fly lists (at the very
least) for EVERY LOAD of jumpers at my facility. I would also be required
to implement very expensive auditing systems to comply with TSA rules. In
other words, I would no longer be able to bring in these aircraft,
effectively shutting down much of my business each year.

They are recreational skydivers, not passengers traveling from point A to
B and they have no interest, ability or opportunity to 'hijack' an
airplane for a terrorist operation.

Rules like this are plain stupid. They fix nothing. They 'solve a
problem' that does not exist, even the TSA admits that in the NPRM.

Why must we be subjected, as Americans, in a free country to rules that do
nothing but cramp and shut down parts of my business and take away basic
human rights from my customers?

Stop this silliness before we sink deeper into a police state and
completely shut down my business.

I generate $2.5M annually in business, drive another $10-$15M each year in
the local economy in hotels, food and entertainment, and employ directly
and indirectly about 50 people. We are one of the good guys. Rules like
this do nothing but stop my business from existing, and for no good reason.

Shut down the TSA Docket TSA-2008-0021 (please)

Sincerely,


David Hayes

David Hayes sent this message via Congress.org, which uses the Capwiz·XC
system. Congress.org is a free public service of Capitol Advantage and
Knowlegis, LLC. You may access Congress.org here: http://congress.org
-----------------------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just got your zhills email and forwarded it to my message board for some mid-atlantic jumpers...

Anyone have some suggestions on things we can write about or address from the skydiver point of view? I read the AOPA page and there are great ideas for pilots and Dave, your stuff to the Senators, etc. is fantastic, but are there any ideas for how to show the impact from the individual jumper's point of view?

Thanks!!
- ever the spazz

Your work is to discover your world, and then with all your heart, give yourself to it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just submitted my comments, and read several pages worth of the comments already submitted.

One suggestion - commenting on an NPRM is NOT the place for a rant about how imbecilic the TSA is. Comments like that (and there were several) just get ignored.

The comment should be written (in good English) and clearly make the point that the proposed regulation will have a big negative impact on your activities (with as much detail as you can provide for your particular situation), and point out that no demonstrated security benefit will result.

USPA, AOPA, NBAA and EAA have each provided lists of "talking points" that you can use to help craft your comments.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0