NATA News

Minutes from this meeting will be available on the NATA ASC web page next week.

As a result of the meeting, the NATA ASC now has a dedicated Web site for all of its issue white papers available for member review. Members may view this page by clicking here.

NATA ASC members not in attendance may also view the PowerPoint presentation provided by the TSA on the Certified Cargo Screening Program. That presentation may be viewed by clicking here.

For more information about this meeting, please contact Eric Byer.

The TSA has determined that the affected air carriers do not have the facilities to be able to meet these requirements without inflicting significant delays and backlogs of unscreened cargo. Therefore, this IFR creates the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP) to allow firms, such as shippers, manufacturers, warehousing entities, distributors, third-party logistics companies, and Indirect Air Carriers (IACs), to become Certified Cargo Screening Facilities (CCSF).

Once certified, the CCSF must—

• Implement the certified cargo screening standard security program that the TSA develops and any amendments to it;
• Appoint security coordinators at the corporate and facility levels and alternates to be available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week;
• Ensure that the following individuals successfully undergo a TSA-conducted security threat assessment:
• Each employee and authorized representative who screens cargo or has unescorted access to screened cargo, and
• each security coordinator and alternate, senior manager of the facility, and other individual who implements the cargo screening program;
• Adhere to strict physical and access control measures for the storage, handling, and screening of cargo;
• Screen cargo using TSA-approved methods;
• Implement chain of custody requirements, including the use of tamper evident technology, which must begin when the cargo is screened and remain intact until the cargo is tendered to the aircraft operator for transport on a passenger aircraft; and
• Apply for recertification, including a new examination by a TSA-approved validator, every 36 months.

NATA staff have evaluated this IFR and produced a comprehensive white paper for members to review by clicking here. This IFR becomes effective on November 16, 2009, and is also open for public comment until November 16, 2009. NATA ASC members are strongly encourage to review this IFR and submit comments to Eric Byer on the NATA staff no later than the close of business on Friday, November 6.

"This survey clearly demonstrates the high, unnecessary costs, delays and obstacles aviation businesses suffer due to the FAA's inconsistent interpretation of the federal aviation regulations," said NATA President James K. Coyne. "The FAA absolutely must find a way to provide consistent regulatory guidance and interpretation."

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has been commissioned by Congress to conduct a study on how inconsistent regulatory interpretations are costing the FAA and the aviation industry millions of dollars in resources and raising serious concerns about unified safety standards.

NATA conducted its survey in response to numerous members' reports of having experienced varying interpretations of federal aviation regulations (FARs) by the agency's Regional, Aircraft Certification (ACOs) and Flight Standards District Offices (FSDOs) and to be able to provide specific information to the GAO as it conducts its study.

According to survey respondents, many affected companies continue to be challenged by regulatory interpretations that vary from one inspector within one FSDO or ACO, to another. These varying interpretations of how to achieve or demonstrate compliance with the FARs are estimated by the respondents to cost general aviation businesses hundreds of millions of dollars annually when previously approved actions are subjected to "re-interpretation." The results of the survey showed:

•87% of respondents stated that their businesses have experienced problems due to inconsistent or incorrect interpretations by local FAA inspectors.
•57% believe that an inconsistent or incorrect local FAA position had safety consequences for their business. Members rated the safety significance as very serious (17%); serious (40%); somewhat serious (35%); and not too serious (8%).
•85% stated they have experienced delays in FAA response that have interrupted their ability to do business.
•75% believe that the delay or denial for a new safety program was related to an incorrect or inconsistent interpretation. In resolving discrepancies, 23% said it took up to 90 days; 20% said up to 120 days; 19% said more than 121 days; and 36% said their issue still is unresolved. 

"Inconsistent compliance interpretations of the FARs are not only costly for the industry, they also demonstrate a shortcoming in the FAA's ability to coordinate its workforce and ensure that the decision-making abilities vested in inspectors are respected across all divisions of the agency," said Coyne.

A compilation of the survey results is available by clicking here.

H.R. 3678 was introduced in response to Security Directive (SD) 1542-04-08G (SD-8G) issued last year that required pilots based at airports serving commercial air carriers to get a badge in order to have unescorted access to the airport. While SD-8G has been troublesome for many airports throughout the country, one of the major concerns was the use of an SD to promulgate regulations where no imminent threat existed. 

To view NATA’s Legislative Report on H.R. 3678, please click here.
NATA is pleased that this legislation was introduced as a stand-alone piece of legislation. It’s imperative that additional Members of Congress co-sign the legislation for the bill to move forward. Please write to your Member of Congress today and urge their support on this important legislation.
To view NATA’s Action Call, please click here.

To view a copy of the legislation, please click here.

Please contact Kristen Moore, kmoore@nata.aero for more information.

• Non-Residential Compatible TTF Access – This type of access would include activities for which space requirements surpass the airport’s ability to offer an on-airport site or the need would absorb so much airport property that it would limit future development for aeronautical activities. The FAA does not encourage this type of access, but a properly structured agreement may be acceptable
• FBO or other Aeronautical Service Providers TTF Access – The FAA does not support this type of agreement.
• Residential TTF Access – “There are no acceptable forms of residential TTF agreements.”

The draft guidance letter also strongly encourages airport sponsors to submit any TTF agreement to their Airports District or Regional Office prior to approval to ensure compliance with federal grant assurances. The draft includes a list of TTF access agreements the FAA will not approve and general procedures for establishing TTF access. Upon completion of its review, NATA will submit comments to the FAA on the contents of the letter.

The full text of the NPRM is available from the EPA Web site.

Conference negotiations between the House and the Senate on H.R. 915/S.1451, the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2009 are likely before the end of the year. Each bill contains a provision requiring additional FAA oversight of foreign repair stations. H.R. 915, which passed the House on May 21, 2009, includes a provision requiring the FAA to certify that all Part 145 certificated foreign repair stations are inspected at least twice a year and requires those organizations to introduce mandatory drug and alcohol testing if they maintain aircraft operated by U.S. airlines. S. 1451, which has not yet been voted on in the Senate, contains similar language regarding repair station inspections but makes an exception if "a bilateral aviation safety agreement is in place that allows for comparable inspection by local authorities."  

The proposed regulation would eliminate a reciprocal audit provision of the U.S.-European Community Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement, or “BASA,” and would unnecessarily raise costs for EU-based repair stations. The potential job loss to U.S. repair stations is high if the companies holding a U.S.-based European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Part 145 repair station certificate lose the reciprocal audit capabilities between the FAA and EASA.

Contact your Members of Congress by visiting NATA’s Legislative Action Center. NATA’s Legislative Action Center provides association members with a quick and easy way to email letters directly to Members of Congress in their state. 

Click here to view a form letter that may be used to contact Members of Congress or their staff.

To view NATA’s comprehensive legislative report on the FY 2010 Homeland Security spending bill, please click here.

NATA staff have reviewed the draft legislation and prepared a legislative report that is available to members for download here.

The 2010 Line Up:

• FBO Success Seminar
• NATA Safety 1st Trainer Seminar (Train the Trainer)
• Environmental Compliance Seminar
• Line Service Supervisor Training Seminar (LSST)

For more information and to register for the seminars, please go to www.nata.aero/springtraining, www.twitter.com/nataaero, or search for National Air Transportation Association on Facebook.

If you haven’t already, we encourage you to follow NATAaero on Twitter and become a fan of the National Air Transportation Association on Facebook for an immediate pulse on association news and events, and access to special offers and resources as well as information about product and service launches, member news and other news of interest.

Reaching out to our members in a new way - James K. Coyne and Eric R. Byer are now hosting blogs. Coyne's monthly blog, NATA President's Capitol View, provides commentary on the current state and future prospects for the aviation business industry. View the inaugural post, "Can't We All Just Get Along?," regarding the USA Today article attacking general aviation and the fundamental change of strategy on the part of the airlines that this article represents. Byer's weekly Inside Washington View blog explores the latest aviation business developments in Washington and provides guidance to help navigate the rocky political landscape. The first post, "Light At The End Of The Tarmac?," tackles the brutal effect the economy has had on our members, but offers a ray of hope for the future...maybe nearer than we dared hope.

For more information on NATA’s Social Media Sources, please click here or contact NATA at (703) 845-9000.

That makes the online member directory on the www.nata.aero Web site a very valuable tool. The directory is searchable by company name, contact name, location or products. The directory can be accessed on the Web site under the NATA tab, by clicking membership and then member directory or by clicking here.

Need to change your email address or phone number? Need to add or remove employees from your company contact list or update your company profile information for the business directory? Company primary contacts can view and change all information for the company, including updating address and demographic information, adding and removing employees, and checking the products and services listings for your company that will be included in the directory. All members can view and change their individual information.

NATA encourages you to ensure that all key personnel are listed as member contacts so you can get the most out of your NATA membership.

To learn more, visit www.nata.aero, login and click on Update Your Profile or contact Linda Pylant for additional information.