Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: TSA security proposal worries aircraft owners, rules don't contain hunter exception

  1. #1
    Regular Member david.ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    1,241

    Post imported post

    I don't know what other states allow hunting from the air, but in Alaska this would crash the aircraft industry completely. Not only just private aircraft but commercial facilities as well. Many have been talking about saying "screw it, I'll sell my plane." Many airports get a hefty fee, 200-400USD, for pilots to park their aircraft.

    They're making security proposals for a problem which doesn't exist!

    I'm listing two articles, and I quote from the first one, "'When we make a rule it's very broad initially so that we can narrow it down as we get the information that we need,' Baird said."

    http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9862552

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- The Transportation Security Administration says it is trying to make the skies safer, but some pilots say it could put them out of business.
    Bart Tiernan flies the only DC-3 on skis in the United States. He gets around to some of the more remote parts of Alaska where things like metal detectors and bomb squads are an afterthought.
    "What are you going to do, steal a DC-3 out of Emmonak and what, are you going to do drive it into a fish camp and kill a lot of salmon? I don't think so," Tiernan said.
    Some Alaska pilots have more important things to worry about than international terrorism, but soon they might not have a choice.
    The TSA has a proposal called the Large Aircraft Security Program. It would classify aircraft heavier than 12,500 pounds as a large aircraft and thus subject to strict security regulations.
    "Well what we saw was that there was a vulnerability perhaps that could be mitigated if we were able to have some rules in place that we could follow and have general aviation follow as well," said Dwayne Baird, a spokesperson for TSA, in a phone interview.
    These regulations would mean affected pilots must go through background checks, they would have to make sure baggage is inspected, and each flight must be approved for departure.
    "If I have to comply with all these regulations I simply can't do it," Tiernan said. "I'm out of business."
    The new rules would also impact pilots who carry hunters and their firearms. A gun is a gun regardless of its intended use and the TSA makes no exceptions for hunters.
    "When we make a rule it's very broad initially so that we can narrow it down as we get the information that we need," Baird said.
    Public comment on the TSA's plan is open for another week.
    Contact Ted Land at tland@ktuu.com

    http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories...cal_1001.shtml

    TSA security proposal worries Alaska aircraft owners
    [font="verdana, sans-serif] By Rob Stapleton
    Alaska Journal of Commerce [/font]

    A new Transportation Security Administration proposal has Alaska pilots and aircraft owners concerned that their aircraft will be over regulated, and may force them to quit flying and scrap their planes.
    The proposal, dubbed the large aircraft security program, would require the owners of aircraft that have a gross weight of 12,500 pounds or more to implement the same security measures used on commercial passenger and air cargo aircraft in the U.S.
    The regulation would require pilots and their mechanics to have criminal background checks, check passengers against the federal "no fly" list, and that flights using these aircraft - both commercially and privately flown - be approved before each departure.

    Don Ballard, a pilot for a DC-3 aircraft, says that should proposed Transportation Security Administration regulations for large aircraft become law, aircraft like the one shown would become scrap metal. Photo/Rob Stapleton/AJOC
    The rule would also require some aircraft to carry federal air marshals if directed to by the TSA.
    The proposal would also require any airport that hosts these aircraft to have on staff a trained TSA officer and the necessary equipment to screen passengers and crew.
    Alaska airports that would be affected by the proposal include Aniak, Dutch Harbor, Galena, Merrill Field, Palmer, Kenai, Lake Hood and Unalakleet and other rural airports used by aircraft for business, commercial and private use.
    TSA officials would not reply to specifics about the proposed rule.
    "The only thing that I can say is that we are hoping to learn more about the concerns of the aviation community about this anti-terrorism regulation for aircraft from comments posted on the NPRM docket (notice of proposed rule making)," said a spokesperson for the TSA.
    The 260-page proposal, finalized in October 2008 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, says the government should consider all aircraft, from 747s to hot air balloon, to be potential threats, according to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, which opposes the rule.
    The costs to conform to such mandates is the main concern for the owners of the aircraft affected. Security measures to facilities could cost as much as $400,000 per airport, according to state DOT officials. Aircraft owners would have to pay for passenger and other security checks.
    If the regulation passes, Bush Air Cargo pilot Don Ballard says his airplane would be scrap metal. Ballard flies building materials, supplies and mining equipment to remote locations with a DC-3 aircraft from the Palmer airport.
    Aircraft used to fly freight and cargo, business charters and medevacs would be affected.
    Alaska large aircraft owners say the proposed regulation would curtail commerce, require expensive changes at state, municipal and privately owned rural airports, and will breach civil rights of rural residents.
    Lee Ryan, the chairman of the Governor's Advisory Board on Aviation, said direct impacts of the overall aviation industry in Alaska represents $4 billion, making it the fifth largest industry in the state.
    "This will have impacts in an already stressed industry," said Ryan.
    Another pilot and private aircraft owner agrees.
    "The large aircraft security program will impose new and onerous security regulations and restrictions on owners, operators, pilots, and passengers, flying in these privately owned aircraft and at medium and large airports that serve large aircraft," said Lars Gleitsmann, an aircraft owner.
    Gleitsmann and 29 others gathered on Feb. 5 at the Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum in Anchorage to discuss how to approach the Alaska congressional delegation to stop this regulation from becoming law.
    If security upgrades at one airport can't be made, owners will have to move their aircraft to airports that meet the TSA requirements.
    "This proposal is ludicrous," said John Reffertt, a Palmer resident and co-owner of two C-119 Flying Boxcars that are parked on the Palmer municipal airport's ramp. "This will force me to move the C-119s, where I am paying $200 a month, to Anchorage international - if they will take the aircraft - where I will have to pay $2,000 or more a month to park them."
    The TSA estimates that the LASP will cost $190 billion to secure approximately 10,000 aircraft in the nation, and says that aircraft owners will pay for 85 percent of the program.
    This amounts to nearly $190,000 per aircraft to create a security program for each aircraft approved by the TSA, criminal background checks of pilots, mechanics and dispatchers, biannual audits of the program, the cost of air marshals, and third-party audits of the passengers and travel authorization, according to estimates by the National Business Aircraft Association.
    The regulation would also oppose Alaska state law, by not allowing firearms or items pilots use in emergency survival kits. Only tools or survival gear that can be accessed by the pilot while in flight can be carried.
    The regulation has a "prohibited items list" that includes 80 items, tools, knives, firearms and even golf clubs, that can't be stored on the aircraft for survival, maintenance or for commercial or industrial use.
    "In many cases the aircraft that will need these so called security mandates are not even worth the $190, 000 that will have to be spent to make them legal to fly again," said Gleitsmann.
    Alaska aircraft owners and pilots who oppose this regulation hope to convince the Alaska congressional delegation of their position for either a waiver or to stop the rule.
    Bart Tiernan, past president of the Alaska Airmen's Association and a large-aircraft owner, said the TSA held several public comment meetings across the country. Notably missing from the meeting list, however, were Alaska and Hawaii, two states that rely most on air traffic using these types of aircraft.
    As proposed, the regulations would apply only to aircraft with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds, but aviation organizations say they worry that the rule would eventually be aimed at smaller aircraft down the road.
    According to written and audio testimony from the hearings posted online, Ed Bolen, president of the National Business Aviation Association, offered his comments at a hearing in Texas Jan. 28.
    "The TSA's proposal would overwhelm businesses, airports and others across the general aviation community, at a time when it is beset with challenges in the current marketplace," Bolen said. "Equally unfortunate, the burden the proposal would produce would not result in a clear security benefit."
    The regulations would affect an estimated 15,000 aircraft, 10,000 operators, and 450 airports nationwide. In Alaska, about 100 aircraft used for freight owned by 25 separate owners would be affected. The number of business aircraft privately owned that fit this category is unknown but substantial, according to Tiernan.
    Finally, the TSA is proposing that aircraft operators pay a third party to conduct regulatory oversight and ensure compliance. What has always been a government function would be outsourced, creating privacy concerns and placing the cost burden on aircraft operators.
    These requirements, if passed would include fingerprinting and performing background checks on all flight crews, vetting passengers against the government's "No Fly List" before every flight.
    "The reality of this regulations is that it will once again add another expense, as an unfunded mandate, require aircraft owners to check their passengers before making a flight and is ridiculous because these aircraft don't have the range to fly anywhere where they could be used as a weapon of destruction, " said Tiernan.
    Public comments on the proposal are due by Feb. 27.
    Rob Stapleton can be reached at rob.stapleton@alaskajournal.com.
    Gays are prominent members of firearm rights, we do more via the courts, don't like it? Leave.
    Religious bigots against same sex marriage are not different than white supremacists.
    I expel anti-gay people off my teams. Tolerance is key to team cohesion and team building.

  2. #2
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    It's nice how every time the fed.gov steps in in the name of "national security" the law-abiding silent majority loses a little more of their God-given liberty.

    We barely own our land (don't pay your property tax and see what they take) and THEY own the skies above.

    To hell with them.

    Private enterprise created the commercial airline business and then the government stepped in claiming some right to regulate it. Now they tell us what we can and can't carry on a plane down to lip balm and paper clips, ensuring that every one of us is defenseless at all times.

    I hope these guys continue to fly and operate "outside" the illegal laws of the fed.gov. We need more patriots. We have enough sheep, thank you.

    [line]The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid.
    Novus Ordo Seclorum
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  3. #3
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Wow, If Alaska allows it (which I highly doubt) it would transform the state indeed!

    I just don't see states like Alaska giving in to this one. The State Sovereignty bills are looking more and more probable with these kinds of federal edicts jumping out at us right and left.

  4. #4
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    This goes beyond Obama boasting "I won" to flaunting "Sarah Palin lost!"

    TFred


  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    110

    Post imported post

    end the fed

  6. #6
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    Buhbuhbuhbuh-whaaa?

    Did you forget to switch accounts?

    PaulBlart wrote:
    end the fed
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    110

    Post imported post

    demnogis wrote:
    Buhbuhbuhbuh-whaaa?

    Did you forget to switch accounts?

    PaulBlart wrote:
    end the fed
    i want more power. i don't work for the fed. when they come in and take over it pisses me off and makes me want to arrest them

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    PaulBlart wrote:
    demnogis wrote:
    Buhbuhbuhbuh-whaaa?

    Did you forget to switch accounts?

    PaulBlart wrote:
    end the fed
    i want more power. i don't work for the fed. when they come in and take over it pisses me off and makes me want to arrest them
    LOL but as a mall cop surely must wannabe a fed?:celebrate

    Back on topic: If Obama were really serious about undoing Bush's damage disbanding the TSA would be high on his list. Somehow I don't think it is...

  9. #9
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    PaulBlart wrote:
    PaulBlart wrote:
    end the fed
    i want more power. i don't work for the fed. when they come in and take over it pisses me off and makes me want to arrest them
    LOL but as a mall cop surely must wannabe a fed?:celebrate

    Back on topic: If Obama were really serious about undoing Bush's damage disbanding the TSA would be high on his list. Somehow I don't think it is...
    Come on Tomahawk! Paul Blart is a good guy in a Barney Fife sort of way. Why make disparaging remarks about him wanting to be a Fed?

    Back on topic: BHO will not undo Bush's constitutional perversions. BHO will exploit the freedom killing laws and rules that Bush handed to him.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •