If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Adventures in TSA land
Today is October 19, and it's starting to look like 49 CFR Part 1552,
which covers flight training for aliens and security procedures for flight schools, is going to become effective tomorrow, unchanged. For the full text, check out http://www.tsa.gov/interweb/assetlib...onGuidance.doc If you're a US citizen looking for flight training in an aircraft of less than 12,500 lbs, or a flight school providing such training, only one aspect of this rule actually affects you starting tomorrow. But first, what's a flight school? If you provide flight training, you're a flight school – even if you're a solo part-time freelancer. Check out p.20. The aspect that kicks in on the 20th is the requirement to establish citizenship. That means you as a student must present proof of citizenship to your flight school, and the flight school must make a copy of it and keep it for 5 years. What constitutes acceptable proof? Well, at least the TSA is specific here. The full list is on p.37-38. So far, not too bad. But it gets worse. Within 90 days of the effective date, which is tomorrow, all flight school employees (and again, that means everyone including contractors, freelancers, independents – and even the people working behind the desk – see p.47-48) must receive initial security awareness training. New hires only have 60 days from date of hire, so be careful about hiring anyone in the next 30 days. Why? Because while TSA has promised to develop the initial security awareness training program, it's not here yet but will be ready "real soon now." Watch this space – or, rather, watch http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?theme=180 for updates. They're promising to be ready no later than October 30. Of course you need not use their training program – you can develop your own, and the TSA lays down some guidelines (see p. 49-51). What the TSA will NOT do is evaluate your program for compliance. Instead, it reserves the right to audit your program at a later date. What happens if you're found not to be in compliance? Expect civil penalties (p.54) You can get a good idea of what to expect by examining the TSA document on civil penalties (remember, these can be assessed without judge or jury) by checking out http://www.tsa.gov/interweb/assetlib...onGuidance.doc Pay special attention to Page 7, which discusses penalties for flight training providers failing to comply with any requirement of the alien pilot training rules. You're looking at up to $10,000 per violation if you're not an aircraft operator, and can expect civil penalties in the maximum range. If you are an aircraft operator, you can be liable for up to $25,000. A year after you complete the initial security awareness training, you need recurrent security awareness training – that year and every year. The TSA will NOT be developing it – you are on your own. They also will not evaluate it. See above – how lucky are you feeling? So how about if you are an alien looking for flight training or a flight school looking to train an alien? It's substantially worse. For the alien, you're looking at being photographed, fingerprinted, background-checked – all at your own expense of course. There will be, as a minimum, a $130 fee. It may go up later (p. 46). That doesn't include the photographs or fingerprints (p.47). The flight school will need to keep a copy of all this stuff too – except the fingerprints. The fee is waived for recurrent training – but that's for people operating under a certificate only. No operations under Part 91 (except subpart K) are recognized as recurrent training. The cost and hassle of BFR's, IPC's, and aircraft/FBO checkouts has just gone up... You will need to register through a special TSA web site, and your flight school will need to verify that registration. Don't count on them being able to do that any time soon, though. A flight school needs to have a user id and password issued to access the web site and verify the registration of alien students. The way to get that user id and password is to register with the local FSDO (see p. 24). Since I trained an alien student last year, and expect that I may train another soon, I called the FSDO. Remember, the deadline is tomorrow; I called last week. This caught the FSDO totally by surprise. I was the first person in the Houston FSDO to call. They had no idea they were supposed to register anyone. The matter is being escalated to Washington. I still haven't gotten a call back. A careful reading of the document (which includes both the text of 1552 and the official explanation) indicates that there is no grandfather clause – the fact that an alien is already taking flight training does not mean said training can continue without meeting the new TSA requirements. Michael |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael" wrote in message
om... Today is October 19, and... a *great* summary of the TSA IFR, but: A careful reading of the document (which includes both the text of 1552 and the official explanation) indicates that there is no grandfather clause - the fact that an alien is already taking flight training does not mean said training can continue without meeting the new TSA requirements. A letter written yesterday, and added to the docket today, by the TSA chief counsel says that it can continue. The letter doesn't use the same terminology as the IFR, but hey. It says "flight students" who are already "enrolled" in such flight training are not subject to the regulation. I support it's up to us whether we regard the guy who takes 6 years for his Part 61 instrument rating and goes through three instructors continues to be enrolled in the training. They don't say how they justify that opinion, but here's my attempt. The definition of candidate is "an alien... who *applies for* flight training...". This definition thus provides the context for everything else. (The definition, by omission, excludes citizens, which can make it easy to misinterpret the rest of the rule.) My emphasis on "applies for", not "undergoes". If you are already in flight training, i.e. you already applied, you are not defined as a candidate. The Category 3 rule says "A flight school may not provide training... to a *candidate*... unless...". The Category 4 rule (which covers BFRs) says "Prior to beginning recurrent training for a *candidate*..." -- David Brooks |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I wrote in message
... I support it's up to us whether we regard the guy who takes 6 years for his Part 61 instrument rating and goes through three instructors continues to be enrolled in the training. support - suppose. Sorry. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder if John and Martha, our buddy Hal, and the AOPA are busy trying to
produce some kind of TSA training video course that will qualify. I can hardly wait to see what shape Martha's hair takes next. My biggest disappointment over all this does not come from the rules themselves, but from the orgainizations, especially NAFI, that claim to keep CFI's informed and represent them. Thanks for the update. Jim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On 10/19/2004 13:17, Michael wrote:
Today is October 19, and it's starting to look like 49 CFR Part 1552, which covers flight training for aliens and security procedures for flight schools, is going to become effective tomorrow, unchanged. For the full text, check out http://www.tsa.gov/interweb/assetlib...onGuidance.doc This is not the rule, but is the Sanctions document. I looked around and was unable to find the full rule (although I could find interpretations of the rule on various sites). Do you have a link to the actual rule? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Egads. I am a Canadian who is in the US as a grad student
(non-resident alien) and was planning on doing flight training this spring. It sounds like these new rules and fees would be a significant burden. This sucks. I wonder if the fact that a went and took an intro lesson a couple of months ago makes me already "enrolled" by their definitions. ;-) Chris -- Chris Colohan Email: PGP: finger Web: www.colohan.com Phone: (412)268-4751 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder if the fact that I went and took an intro lesson a couple of months ago makes me already "enrolled" by their definitions. ;-) Nope. It makes you a potential terrorist by their definition. Remember back to the 911 hearings? They asked someone from the FBI if there had been any red flags before the attack. "Senator", was the reply, "We were in a sea of red flags. We just didn't know which were the important ones." I think this was one of the most important lessons to come out of the hearings. TSA's response to threats is to red flag EVERYTHING! Then, if there is an attack, they'll be able to say they had a red flag on the target. The folks who make the U.S. flags that clip onto your car windows will make another bundle and everyone will overlook the fact that the TSA didn't actually secure anything. You should be glad you have Canada to go back to. -- Roger Long |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Roger Long" wrote in message ... I wonder if the fact that I went and took an intro lesson a couple of months ago makes me already "enrolled" by their definitions. ;-) Nope. It makes you a potential terrorist by their definition. Remember back to the 911 hearings? They asked someone from the FBI if there had been any red flags before the attack. "Senator", was the reply, "We were in a sea of red flags. We just didn't know which were the important ones." I think this was one of the most important lessons to come out of the hearings. TSA's response to threats is to red flag EVERYTHING! Then, if there is an attack, they'll be able to say they had a red flag on the target. The folks who make the U.S. flags that clip onto your car windows will make another bundle and everyone will overlook the fact that the TSA didn't actually secure anything. You should be glad you have Canada to go back to. Until it is declared a threat by our goverment and we occupy it then take it over. -- Roger Long |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Best airport to land at for Vancouver | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 2 | June 11th 04 04:27 AM |
Where CAN you land your plane?? | ET | Piloting | 28 | February 27th 04 10:29 PM |
Can the F-14 carry six AIM-54s and land on carrier? | Matthew G. Saroff | Military Aviation | 1 | October 29th 03 08:14 PM |
Sharon's plan-Steal more land | Grantland | Military Aviation | 0 | October 15th 03 07:24 PM |
How I got to Oshkosh (long) | Doug | Owning | 2 | August 18th 03 12:05 AM |