The Next Phase
General aviation airports and businesses brace for tighter security
By Jeff Price
July 2002
About the Author Jeff Price is a consultant with Denver-based Av i a t i o n Manage-ment C o n s u l t i n g Group. He has served in airport management at Jefferson County, Stapleton, and Denver Interna-tional Airports, and is a former member of the Colorado Aeronau-tics Board. He also teaches aviation management part time at the Metropolitan State College of Denver. He can be reached at jprice@aviationmanage-ment. com or (303) 792-2700.
AAAE Submits GA Recommendations
The American
Association of Airport Executives in June delivered its recommendations
for security at general aviation airports to John Magaw, head of
the Transportation Security Adminis-tration. AAAE is calling for
establishing four categories of GA airports for security purposes,
based on runway length, location, and number of based aircraft.
Central to the association's plan
is creation of a new source of dedicated federal funding for GA
airports to use for implementing any mandated security regulations.
AAAE calls for preparation of a comprehensive
security plan at all four classes of general aviation airports.
NATA Signs On Airport for Smart Card
The National Air Transpor-tation
Association recently signed on the Stuart Airport (FL) to use its
new SkyGuard employee identification program that will be used for
some 500 employees of the airport and tenant companies.
SkyGuard is a biometric smart card
that includes a color photo and biometrically imbedded fingerprint
and is used for gaining access to secure airport areas.
Stuart is a general aviation facility
north of West Palm Beach.
FlightSafety was the first company
to sign on with SkyGuard, which was officially introduced earlier
this year.
GA
airports and airport businesses have the opportunity to take an ounce
of prevention and hopefully hold off any debilitating and possibly unnecessary
regulations.
Obstacles to regulating GA airports are
significant. The Transporta-tion Security Administration already has its
hands full with airline screening issues, tight Congressional deadlines,
and hiring 40,000 people in a year. GA airports are not regulated specifically
in the Code of Federal Regulations, and most experts agree that GA airports
are not likely terrorist targets. The concern regarding general aviation
is more about access to aircraft rather than protection of a specific
GA facility or site.
We all know how quickly the government
can add regulations when they want. They don't always ask for our permission,
nor do they even need to have a good idea of how they're going to enforce
them, fund them, or interpret them. They just need one ambitious senator
- or worse, a devastating terrorist attack using general aviation aircraft.
"If they were to do any regulating
of GA airports, they would have to come up with a scheme on how to do
it for all of the facilities that are used by GA, from Chicago O'Hare
down to a private grass strip," says Craig Williams, director of
safety and security for the American Association of Airport Executives
(AAAE).
Williams believes the FAA/TSA will initially
stay focused on those areas they already control. "They're going
for the low-hanging fruit, figuring out how to regulate airspace, pilots,
and aircraft. You can cover a lot of bases doing that."
Without getting too deep into the technical
aspects, the real threat of general aviation aircraft is mostly in the
larger planes that can carry either a lot of fuel or haul a lot of explosives.
AAAE's proposal
What security levels can one expect at
GA airports in the future? The answer is a moving target. The American
Association of Airport Executives has been working on a set of recommendations
by way of a special task force with other industry groups (see sidebar).
Draft recommendations include ...
o Classifying GA airports into four categories,
based on proximity to major population centers or security sensitive locations,
such as nuclear sites and whether the airport has over 200 based aircraft.
The higher airport security classifications, 1 and 2, theoretically will
require higher security measures.
o Each airport will draft a security plan
and may be required to install additional lighting on airport access points,
fuel farms, and aircraft parking areas. Category 1 and 2 airports would
require access control procedures and gate control systems, more signage,
and installation of fencing or electronic monitoring. Questions still
remain on who would review and approve these security plans, and what
specifically they should include.
o Category 1 and 2 for GA airports would
be required to conduct criminal history record checks for airport and
airport business employees.
o Develop a system for communicating security
sensitive information to GA airport managers.
o Develop a "smart card" type
of pilot's license. This sort of recommendation has already been met with
resistance in the pilot community and with logistical problems. The Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association has come up with its own alternatives.
o Requiring GA aircraft to be secured when
not in use.
o Develop a program to assess new security
technologies.
o Adding contract control towers for better
safety and surveillance of the airfield.
The recommendations mirror those of some
other organizations, but any final rulemaking will likely be after much
debate and consideration. In addition to the recommendations, AAAE offers
several suggestions for funding any new programs.
Past is prologue
The government solution to GA security
has been to shut down facilities near sensitive sites and impose other
airspace restrictions, crippling the businesses and airports involved.
However, when the flight restrictions were lifted at GA airports near
Washington D.C., it provided a glimpse of the government's idea of what
constitutes a secure GA airport in a populated area.
Restrictions put in place included background
checks for pilots and airport employees, specific arrival and departure
procedures, mandatory flight plans, and ATC contact with Mode-C transponders.
In all likelihood, any final rules will probably be a mix of industry
recommendations and what's in place (or anticipated) at some commercial
service airports.
Another consideration is the impact on
general aviation businesses at commercial service airports. These businesses
will probably see the most change with new Airport Tenant Security Agreements
shifting liability to the business from the airport. Changes to escort
procedures for commercial vehicles on ramps and potentially even security
checkpoints on the Air Operations Area and screening at airport perimeter
gates may also be a reality.
Interim steps
There are many proactive and low or even
no cost measures an airport and its businesses can do to prevent a terrorist
attack and maybe even get the U.S. Senate to change its opinion of GA
airport security.
o Every airport should conduct a security
site assessment, with an eye towards deterring or preventing unauthorized
access to an aircraft. It's unlikely that a terrorist attack would be
directed at the infrastructure of a GA airport, so don't spend a lot of
time worrying about stand-off distances and site hardening.
o The simplest (and cheapest) measure is
communications. Besides posting emergency numbers around the airport,
go the extra step and designate a security point-of-contact for each airport
business. Make sure airport administration has this information on file
with numbers to reach the person (or someone who can take action) 24/7.
The security contact serves as the central dissemination point and oversees
businesses' security plans and measures.
o Airport managers can establish a system
of reporting routine security information to airport businesses via weekly
emails, faxes, or monthly meetings. The same distribution lists can be
used in emergency situations, as the communication pathways are already
established.
o Managers should check compatibility of
their airport radio equipment with local law enforcement. If the equipment
is not compatible, then other procedures need to be created so the two
groups can communicate in an emergency.
o Airport operators should establish a
system for contacting the appropriate law enforcement agencies, and ensure
that the system works. Don't settle for just "calling 911" and
think it's going to get help right away. Don't assume police dispatchers
and responding officers automatically know what they're supposed to do.
Talk to the local law enforcement agency, along with the local FAA/TSA
and FBI representatives. Get their off-duty phone numbers and establish
a system of reporting suspicious behavior and direct threats.
o Establish procedures with the control
tower (or the nearest FAA air traffic control facility) to notify them
immediately in the case of an armed takeover of an aircraft on the ground
or the theft of a large aircraft. Again, don't assume the police or even
the FAA local offices have quick access to this information.
o Leaving the lights on and locking up
are still the two best ways to deter intruders. Ensure that lights covering
aircraft parking areas and airport access gates are replaced quickly when
they burn out and that fuel trucks, snow plows, airport fire trucks, and
operations/maintenance vehicles are secured when not in use.
o The best way to tell if something is
out of the ordinary is to know what is normal. Teach all airport and airport
business employees to look for things that seem unusual to them and have
a reporting method in place.
o Review or create emergency contingency
plans for bomb threats, building evacuation, armed takeover of an aircraft,
threatening mail - both regular mail and email - and suspicious vehicles
and packages.
o Airport businesses, especially charters,
flight schools, and FBOs can establish positive identification procedures
to ensure people getting into a GA aircraft are the ones that are supposed
to be flying the plane.
o Airport managers can implement into their
minimum standards and rules and regulations certain security requirements
such as mandatory monitoring of personnel on leasehold areas and ensuring
airport access gates are secured.
o For GA facilities on commercial service
airports, the best defense against over-regulation is a good offense.
Make sure employees are the models of airport security when it comes to
complying with the rules already in place. The more problems an airport
security manager has with a certain tenant, the more likely regulations
and even more stringent control of current regulations will occur.
