Aviation Security Derogations

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:47 pm

You may know that the DfT is consulting on the proposal by the EU to apply security measures to all airports. The issue is what derogations will be allowed that would exempt airports handling only smaller aircraft. An "airport" could be anything.

Although the consultation closed on 3 March the DfT said they would extend it so we could also comment on what constitutes an "airport". Then they decided not to extend it after all but did not tell us. Excellent.

You may want to tell the DfT what you think about this and they say they will accept your comments over the next few days. The LAA advice is on the consultation link under closed consultations - we suggest you support Option 3. The DfT stuff has been moved and is now here http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/clo ... nsecurity/

John

J.C. · Post by **J.C.** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:33 am

1 day and not one response.
No doubt Brian will be along following this post to slap my wrist in his well intentioned way and tell me not to knock the LAA.
Well before he does, let me say that I do my bit behind the scenes and I fully support the LAA.
Sad truth is that this once lively forum is dead in the water.
I don't think its too much of a coincidence that the decline started when every one had to use their own names. That is just a statement of fact, maybe people are shy, but whatever the reason the fact stands and I didn't come here to debate it.
Nowadays John you will reach many more LAA enthusiasts on the Flyer Forums or even on Prune. The response to my posts on the subject of BB fly ins is irrefutably proof of this statement.

May I respectfully suggest that you copy this post on those forums if you wish to reach a wider audience on important matters such as this post.
Best regards, John Cook.

Bill Scott · Post by **Bill Scott** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:18 pm

Well I'm not afraid to speak my mind, but I fear that these consultation processes generally pay lip service to a notion of democracy.
Thirty years of the Provos never needed the level of legislation and proposed anti-terrorist measures we now face. Quite frankly, they can make whatever rules they wish if they so choose. As for me, I will continue to live my peaceful life harming nobody and if that breaches their so called laws, so be it.
I commited a criminal act on Monday night.... Put out our wheelie bin with the lid not fully down !

mikehallam · Post by **mikehallam** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:17 pm

If you mean the EUTS document, I rec'd it asked them a question about its applicability & rec'd ans answer. As my strip is clearly outside their terms i didn't feel an y more was needed ?

Quote from all that :
"Dear EU ETS aviation team,

Thank you for the useful links to the detailed documents, but which meant over 100 pages to read !
However my field was certainly NOT in the 2006 list of operators. Towards the end I found the <5,700 kg exemption clause, this is over ten times any of our base aircraft mtow.

In these circumstances I beg to be excused from completing your forms.

Regards,

Mike Hallam [Jackrell's Farm, England.]
----- Original Message -----
From: Aviation EUETS (DECC)
To: mikehallamG
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: EU Directive (2008/101/EC) to include Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System

Dear Mike

Thank you for your email regarding the inclusion of aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). We apologise for the delay in responding.

In the Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2009 at:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20092301_en_1

Regulation (3) defines an aircraft operator as a person that “performs an aviation activity” and is a “UK operator” in each calendar year from 1st January 2009. Regulation (2) interprets a “UK Operator” as a person who is identified on the Commission List and specified in that list as an operator to be administered by the UK. The Commission’s list published on 22 August 2009 can be found here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex ... 094:EN:PDF . “aviation activity” refers to the category of aviation activity listed in Annex I to the EU ETS Directive.

Annex I of the Directive sets out what defines aviation activities in the EU ETS. The Directive is available at:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex ... 021:EN:PDF

Annex I also includes a list of exemptions. One that may be relevant given your description below is for flights performed by aircraft with a certified maximum take-off mass of less than

5 700 kg.

We hope this reply is helpful. Please let us know if you have any further queries.

Kind regards

EU ETS aviation team

DECC

From: mikehallamG [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 22 January 2010 14:07
To: Aviation EUETS (DECC)
Subject: Fw: EU Directive (2008/101/EC) to include Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System

I haven't seen any reply to the below, could you possibly let me have an answer ?

Regards,

Mike Hallam [Jackrell's Farm airfield]

----- Original Message -----

From: mikehallamG

To: [email protected]

Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 9:43 PM

Subject: EU Directive (2008/101/EC) to include Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System

Dear Sirs,

EU Directive (2008/101/EC) to include Aviation in the EU Emissions Trading System

Thank you for advising & sending me the documents concerned with the above entitled proposals.

It would help me greatly as operator of a very small airfield in England, if you could spell out where 'operator' is defined as although I take it you mean a Limited Company or Corporation which runs an airline or public air usage business, it appears as drafted to include any form of aviation at all. Thus any motor powered aeroplane user or provider of landing facility is encompassed !

Could you alternatively kindly point to those descriptive sentences in the documentation which may clarify or otherwise steer my possibly erroneous understanding, in order that I might comment usefully in returning the immensely large & in my case I fear over comprehensive and convoluted form you prepared, with the expectation that I would complete. ?

Kind Regards,

Mike Hallam [email protected]

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:51 pm

Hello Mike,

my what a big post.

I too read the emissions trading document but when I saw the 5700kg lower limit I decided not to bother the membership. This consultation is the one that may require you to carry out a risk assessment and impliment "alternative security measures" at your strip. We have been told by DfT that the EU considers strips and small airfields to be "airports".

John

mikehallam · Post by **mikehallam** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:57 pm

FWIW.
I quickly read the intro. doc't posted on this thread & saw I was 8 days late, so have dropped 'them',
[email protected] <[email protected]>,
an e-mail.

mikehallam.

Airports Security EU regulations developments. #300/2008
It was only today from reading the UK LAA (Light Aviation Association) web forum that I became aware something was in discussion which might affect my own microlight airstrip in England.
However looking so far only at the EU introductory letter they published, it seems aimed at bigger operators, than non-registered very light aircraft simple grass strips. In any case the deadline of 3rd March 2010 for responding is already past !
Can I take it that I still am expected to spend some hours - too late anyway - to read, understand & comment back to you, when the EU didn't bother to contact me in the first place ? Or with such light operations and greenfield site we fall way below your terms of reference and not need to become involved ?

mike newall · Post by **mike newall** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:01 pm

Replied in my usual - robust manner...... Baaa !

Mike Potts · Post by **Mike Potts** » Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:41 pm

A bit late I know.
I contacted the DfT after reading their document and asked if the meeting on the 26th Feb 2010 was open to the pubic.
I was told that it only applied to airport/airfield operators.
In that light I did not bother to make any submission as obviously they were not interested.
Mike Potts

Andrew Leak · Post by **Andrew Leak** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:49 pm

Just reading the posts here and as yet another consultation document hits us again, I am wondering why do we bother to respond to these pointless and soul destroying documents from Europeland? I fly both SEP and gliders, whilst this can be very nice when we get the weather, I am hit by consultations from both sides -powered and non-powered. I have seen many pilot friends stop flying because they are sick and tired of the constant barrage from either the CAA/EASA and now EuroControl and quite rightly so. We have seen aircrew licensing, radio frequencies grab (returned recently), security, Airspace grabs, insurance for pax, Mode S and goodness what ever else they can think of, bite us constantly on the rear - oh yes, local councils wanting to close our airfields! Whilst I have tried to read the latest drivel from EuroControl (yet another pointless Quango) I wonder if my efforts will be ignored, only later for the same document come round again for another go. This has come to light with the latest creation deeming all glider flying as 'aerobatic', no flights below 500 feet (I think that will kill all GA off as well), no slope or ridge soaring, mandatory flight planning (in a glider- are they serious?). I digress, but my point here is that I think I am as legal as I can be for the present and then I will watch, if I am suddenly a 'Lawbreaker' when I approach to land at my airfield , then so be it. It is at that point when I will call it a day, as I really don't think replying to some of these half-witted consultations works much of the time as they appear to be more political than practical. I will now be doing what the French do, ignore it for as long as possible as it will change within a few months or a year anyway. Sorry for the outburst, but I don't often post here nowadays as I find the whole Europe thing a bore and a waste of energy - necessary though, some may think. Maybe that's the problem, the LAA forum is too deep, with all the legislation frightening members off? Only a thought.

regards.

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:43 pm

Hi Andrew, I'm sure we are all as peed off about the constant barrage of consultations and regulation that appears to be wanting to restrict our enjoyment of aviation to a minimum. And like you, I know of those who have thrown in the towel because they have simply had enough. However, at LAA we do have a very competent team who do their utmost to ensure that recreational GA's viewpoint does get heard. If you do nothing else, please at least read John Brady's articles in the magazine and follow his layman's advice on what is required to lodge a view. Often, John's explanations are all you need to read to understand the situation well enough to make a rational response.
Now, we could all decide to sit back fat dumb and happy and do nothing, but do you really believe that ultimately we will be able to continue to enjoy our flying unhindered? Mode S is a prime example of people standing up for what they believe to be fair and just. CAA's opening gambit was that everybody was going to have to fit it from parachutists to jumbos, and make no mistake, if we'd all sat back and said nothing, that's exactly what we would have had.
People power does work, and to those who take on the task of representing us at international and national level, and, like John Brady, trawl through the tomes of consultations and gather evidence and advice so we can understand and make valid comment, I am eternally grateful. We owe it to them to do our bit and respond when asked to do so.

mikehallam · Post by **mikehallam** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:09 pm

I suppose, Andrew Leak, you are referring to this ? mikehallam.
Eurocontrol and the rules of the air
Eurocontrol have published a mandate detailing standardised European rules of the air. Everyone should at least read the information here about how this may affect our hobby.
(See the BGA website http://www.eurocontrol.int/enprm/public ... m10002.htm

I read it and they propose all flying which even in part crosses notifiable airspace requires a flight plan to be filed.
Funnily enough, lots of Mode 'C' is mentioned but they obviously haven't got their corporate tentacles correctly entwined round our GA throats as not a whisper of 'S'. ??
As he says, regardless, Mode'S' is a must already for some folk: even several flexwingers in Kent are affected.
The serial CAA/EASA paper storm either announced or merely slipped in is alarming.
Then there's the renewed & separate (unco-ordinated) attack on our safety frequency use from Ofcom.

Not really the way to encourage British citizens to remain in touch with the legalities, nor to admire the crushing beurocratic force that the EU has become. I doubt our new Parliament will care one jot about us either.

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:19 am

Actually there is no immediate cause for alarm on the draft European Rules of the Air which are pretty much direct copies of the ICAO rules under which we currently operate.
For example there is no point in getting excited about the proposed definition of aerobatic flight bacause it is exactly the same as the one that has been in the rules for donkey's years. I have not noticed any glider pilots being arrested for pulling up into a lift.

That said there are some issues that need to be resolved including the removal of UK differences and we are working on this. We and the CAA are in much the same camp on this.

However I need a more up to date copy of ICAO Annex 2 rules of the air. Does anyone have a copy of ICAO Annex 2 edition 10 (2008). Mine is 1994!

John

Chris B · Post by **Chris B** » Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:01 pm

Hi John,

http://dcaa.slv.dk:8000/icaodocs/Annex% ... dition.pdf

is 10th Edition 2005. You may be able to find the amendments since then on the same site.

All the best

Chris