|
USA Today
"Counterpoint" By Ed Bolen
06/07/2005
Industry's plan good for D.C.;
Security, economy will improve with the return of small planes.
Anyone who fears homeland security will be threatened if general
aviation flights return to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport is
letting fear overrule common sense.
For everyone in general aviation -- which includes more than 200,000
private planes, charters and other aircraft -- the security of airports,
including Reagan Washington National, is paramount. That's why the
industry voluntarily worked with federal officials to enhance security
at airports large and small following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
As a result of our efforts, security for general aviation flights
nationwide includes a program to report suspicious activity, a
requirement for photo IDs for flight crews, broader financial reporting
rules and new procedures for airport and hangar security.
Under the plan developed by the Transportation Security Administration
for reopening Reagan National airport to general aviation, even tighter
regulations will apply -- rules that surpass those required of
commercial flights. That's not my opinion, but the assessment of the
plan provided by David Stone, who heads the TSA. When the plan was
announced last month, Stone noted that it strikes a good balance between
restoring access and increasing security, and he added: "The plan
exceeds the level of security required for commercial aviation that
currently operates in and out of Reagan Airport."
More than $171 million already has been lost to the region's economy as
a result of the prolonged closure of Reagan National airport to general
aviation, along with hundreds of jobs. It's time to stop those losses
and implement reasonable security protections while bringing economic
activity back to the airport. The TSA's plan is a significant step in
the right direction.
The general aviation community seeks the same access to Reagan National
as everyone else, with appropriate security measures. That can be
achieved through the application of risk-based security measures applied
fairly to the different types of aircraft operators that use the
airport. To govern in any other way is to give our enemies cause to
celebrate.
Ed Bolen, president and CEO
National Business Aviation Association
Washington
In response to:
USA Today
Editorial "Viewpoint"
06/07/2005
Safer skies? Not this way
When a small plane breached restricted airspace over Washington and flew
within 3 miles of the White House last month, the brief scare was a
chance to assess air security over this high-risk territory.
It wasn't a pretty sight.
Workers at the White House and Capitol evacuated in a near panic.
Helicopters that first reached the stray aircraft lacked the authority
and firepower to shoot down a rogue plane. Military jets had trouble
communicating with the clueless pilots, who were lucky they weren't
blown out of the sky.
So how did government officials respond to the chaos caused by a single
small plane and fresh evidence that the skies over Washington remain
vulnerable?
They invited more planes to fly on in.
Days after the incident, the Homeland Security Department announced that
it will soon allow private planes - which oftenferry politicians,
lobbyists and corporate executives - to use Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport, across the Potomac River from the White House. That's
a risky reversal of rules that put the airport off-limits to small
aircraft after 9/11 because of its proximity to high-profile targets.
Not content with the changes at Reagan National airport, the politically
potent Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association is making a new push to
reduce the size of the restricted airspace around Reagan National and
the two other major airports that serve the Washington area. Never mind
that the last thing Washington needs is more flights buzzing the
capital, increasing false alarms, giving defenders less time to react
and raising the potential for a deadly mistake in which an innocent
plane is shot down.
We might feel more sympathetic if the lackadaisical security for private
planes had been ratcheted way up after 9/11. Instead, the government has
ducked security for the nation's 220,000 private planes and their
well-connected owners:
- Nearly four years after terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, pilots'
licenses contain no photographs, making it relatively easy for a
terrorist to use someone else's license. In 2002, the Federal Aviation
Administration ordered pilots to carry another form of photo ID - a
solution pushed by the small-plane lobby. Only now, after a new law
required photos, is the FAA working on a plan to put them on licenses.
- To prevent foreign terrorists from getting flight training, the
government now requires background and fingerprint checks for foreign
student-pilot candidates. Even so, a report last November by Congress'
bipartisan Government Accountability Office found limitations in the
government's ability to oversee the background check process.
- Owners of corporate jets handle their own passenger and baggage
screening without government mandates for X-ray equipment or other
technology.
At least the decision to allow 48 small-aircraft flights a day into
Reagan National carries stricter rules, including enhanced background
checks for crews and passengers. The Transportation Security
Administration says these flights will be tracked, making it easier to"quickly identify" unauthorized flights.
Perhaps. But the FBI and other security experts warned as recently as
February that as security improves for commercial aircraft, terrorists
may find smaller planes a more tempting target.
Until security for those planes is improved significantly, the risks of
increased air traffic exceed the benefits to a favored few.
| 
