TSA Takes Over Issuance/Maintenance of Certificates, in New NPRM

In the Federal Register Friday, you'll be able to see that you can be knocked out of the air -- just like that -- if the TSA alleges that you pose a 'security risk.' Pilots will be immediately grounded; mechanics, DERs -- everybody who holds a certificate of any kind from the FAA -- can be immediately out of a job.

The TSA will notify you that you are considered a 'security risk.' It will notify the FAA; and the FAA will immediately suspend your ticket(s), pending your 'appeal.'

You will then have to convince the TSA (which already declared you a 'security risk') that you are not a 'security risk,' without your knowing why they think you are such a risk. Then, when the TSA issues its final ruling, the FAA will revoke your papers.

We wanted some confirmation on this, and called the TSA. Chris Rhatigan, in the press office there, said, "You may have to talk to the FAA on that."

We read her a part of the summary, which says, "This final rule expressly makes a person ineligible to hold FAA-issued airman certificates if the Transportation Security Administration notifies the FAA in writing that the person poses a security threat."

As we continued reading, and noted that the TSA was calling the shots, she said, "Hold on a second." She returned, and said, "This [determination that you're a security threat] comes from an intelligence database." OK -- so, how do we know how big a threat, or how it's determined that one even is such a threat? "We don't tell people how to get on to that database," she said. In other words, if you're denied your certificate, you won't be able to find out why -- just that someone, somewhere, thinks you're a 'security risk.'

Ms Rhatigan informed us that everything would be spelled out in the NPRM, and that we'd have to wait until Friday, to see what was getting published in the Federal Register. Well, folks the law goes into effect Friday. No NPRM. No discussion. Decree. Tough.

Well, we have an advance copy of that law. The document's "explanation" is merely procedural; there is no underlying reasoning explained; and the airman is simply screwed, without recourse.

First, you're grounded -- no questions asked. Then you can start the 'appeal' process.

Here's how it works: the TSA will notify the purported 'security risk' that he is considered a 'security risk,' and the FAA will immediately ground the flier/mechanic/etc. The accused can then tell the TSA that he's not a 'security risk;' but, without knowing on what basis the determination was initially made, the accused is defending himself, blindfolded. The TSA is then the final arbiter of determining whether the accused (whom they have already declared a 'security risk,' while possibly taking away his means of making a living and likely ruining his reputation) actually is a 'security risk.'

ALPA's Initial Reaction

John Mazor, spokesman for ALPA, the largest pilots' union, told ANN that his organization is taking a close look at the NPRM. It was too early to say anything definitive (we had told the union of this NPRM just minutes earlier); but he was willing to say, "As described, it has some disturbing implications." He assured us, "ALPA's security people are interested in studying the NPRM."

[Note: we reported earlier that this is to be an NPRM, with a comment period. Nope. It's just the way it is, effective Friday --ed.]

FMI: www.tsa.gov, www2.faa.gov/avr/arm/rinah84.pdf