TSA drops onerous GA security proposal

The TSA’s withdrawal notice, published March 16, cited the agency’s “re-evaluation” of public input including more than 7,000 formal comments, culminating a successful advocacy effort by AOPA and other members of the general aviation community, said Nobuyo Sakata, AOPA director of aviation security.

The proposal, known as the large aircraft security program (LASP), was introduced in October 2008. It sought to make security programs, crew vetting, and passenger watchlist matching mandatory for GA aircraft weighing more than 12,500 pounds, regardless of the type of operation. LASP also proposed new requirements for airports that serve private and corporate flight operations.

GA opposition surfaced immediately in public meetings, with letters of opposition from aviation organizations and their supporters in Congress, and in regulatory filings.

An AOPA survey taken shortly after the plan’s introduction panned its “unprecedented” mandates. “In the survey, members questioned the limits on personal freedom, financial impacts, and potential implications of the rule for the broader GA community, seeing this as a start for the federal government to regulate all noncommercial operations,” AOPA reported on Oct. 9, 2008.

In a joint letter in February 2009, AOPA, the National Business Aviation Association, the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, and the Experimental Aircraft Association highlighted the industry’s work to take the initiative on security awareness—long before LASP was proposed.

“The general aviation industry has been very aggressive promoting security initiatives since the terrorist attacks of 9-11,” they wrote. “When it comes to security, the general aviation community has led, not followed. We take a back seat to no one in our commitment to security, and our actions to date have demonstrated that fact. However, the proposals put forth in the LASP Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) will do little to improve general aviation security and will have disastrous consequences on the industry.”

In a regulatory brief published to educate members about LASP, AOPA noted that LASP failed to recognize “the inherent differences that exist between private and commercial aviation” and attempted “to impose costly and unnecessary security regulations without justification.”

Sakata credits the GA community’s active involvement in the regulatory process for making GA’s unified voice heard on the LASP issue. AOPA continues to actively participate in the Aviation Security Advisory Committee and work cooperatively with the TSA to address security concerns and improve other security programs such as the DCA Access Standard Security Program for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, and the Alien Flight Student Program.

“AOPA’s advocacy and our members’ participation led directly to the withdrawal of this proposal,” she said.