TSA Sees Fight Against BizAv Security Rule
Benet Wilson and Kerry Lynch 
The Transportation Security Administration is beginning the process of evaluating the 4,800-plus comments that were flowing into the docket on the controversial Large Aircraft Security Program (LASP) proposal. The comment deadline closed Feb. 27, and TSA received a burst of last-minute comments that ran overwhelmingly against the proposal. The docket continued to grow last week as each comment was cataloged.
Published in October, the proposal would apply many of the security requirements already in place for commercial carriers to private aircraft weighing more than 12,500 pounds. The proposal essentially folds several of the existing security requirements under one umbrella and expands the requirements to Part 91 operators.
TSA has disparate programs for charters and airlines, Erik Jensen, the agency's acting general manager for general aviation, told BA. "We just wanted one program to align these efforts not based on FAA regulations, but the size of an aircraft," he explained.
The agency went through a studied process to develop LASP, Jensen said. "We worked with subject matter experts on staff and with economists and consultants outside TSA to create all various elements of the proposal," he explained.
The original LASP proposal was unveiled in November 2007, but it was withdrawn, Jensen said. "We wanted to make sure all input was there and that the industry was represented, so we took it back to further look at the economics and the risks," he explained.
TSA has always wanted input on LASP from the industry, Jensen said. "We held the five public meetings and gave an extension for feedback so we could better understand the issues out here and make the necessary adjustments," he said.
The next step is to put comments in groups arranged by topic, Jensen said. "We'll then go through the comments, respond and decide our next steps," he said.
Comments have been filed by most of the general aviation groups, state agencies, corporations, lawmakers and individuals, among others. Many of the comments have appealed to TSA to scrap the proposal and form a government/industry group to develop something that would satisfy the security concerns of TSA while still providing flexibility to private operations.
Among those recommending a substantial rewrite were seven House Republicans, who wrote 23 pages of comments warning that the current proposal could lead to legal or congressional roadblocks. "TSA is faced with stark choices in this rule making," the lawmakers said. "It can continue down its current heading, thereby incurring possible legal challenges or congressional obstacles. Or TSA can heed the advice in these comments and select a flight path that will lead to a more reasoned decision-making process."
The lawmakers believe that TSA did not adequately assess the full costs or impact of the proposal on private operators, nor did the agency follow proper procedures in the rulemaking. "The proposed rule demonstrates that TSA is not conducting rational rulemaking," said Reps. Sam Graves (Mo.), Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.), Blaine Luetkemeyer (Mo.), Todd Tiahrt (Kan.), Nathan Deal (Ga.), John Duncan (Tenn.) and W. Akin (Mo.).
'Unreasonably Expansive'
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association called the current proposal "an unreasonably expansive and intrusive response to an undocumented and unproven security threat." The association urged TSA to work with the general aviation community to "fill the sizeable information gaps" in the proposal and explore alternatives. "The proposal fails to recognize the inherent differences that exist between private and commercial aviation," AOPA said.
National Business Aviation Association also outlined several concerns. The association noted that the agency selected the 12,500-pound weight threshold without providing a data-driven, risk-based analysis.
NBAA also questioned the proposal's list of more than 80 prohibited items from operations. "Unfortunately, many of these items are routinely carried aboard business aircraft - everyday tools, for example - because they are central to NBAA members' business needs or are products produced by the company," said NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen. NBAA further questioned potential requirements for the use of third-party watch-list service providers and for a federal air marshal aboard certain aircraft.
"This proposal completely misses the mark," Bolen said. "The TSA needs to understand that in preparing the LASP, the agency has attempted to overlay a security regime for the big airlines onto tens of thousands of businesses all across the country."
"We have repeatedly told the TSA that their proposal is the most significant and extensive regulatory change on the operation of general aviation airplanes that has ever been proposed," said Pete Bunce, president and CEO of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association. "This kind of proposal warrants the same collaborative approach the Federal Aviation Administration uses in aviation rulemaking." Visit aviationweek.com/biz for a related blog post on this issue.
By Benet J. Wilson and Kerry Lynch (benet_wilson@aviationweek.com, kerry_lynch@aviationweek.com)
Photo of Gulfstream G550: Gulfstream
