I am told that a new Homeland Security regulation is about to go into affect this Monday, May 18, 2009. A permit needs to be obtained for private
aircraft flying into or out of Mexico from the USA and it takes five days to obtain, also a complete manifest must accompany the solicitation.
I remember seeing this announced last fall and I have some private pilots here that will be cutting their trip short because of it. since they never
got the permit and don't want the hassle they will depart LTO on Sunday instead of later in the week.airmech - 5-15-2009 at 07:06 AM
Unless they learn how to do the EAPIS request on the computer they will never be back. (It's a pain and has no benefit for anyone.) But once they do
it they can preregister before they leave home for the up and back trips and be done with it. If you have a decent connection they could get on from
LTO and stay longer. bgReeljob - 5-15-2009 at 07:30 AM
Actually we have been using it in a trial mode since December.
It is a P in TA but not too dificult to use. It does not take 5 days. You just file the paperwork on line & receive an immediate response.capt. mike - 5-15-2009 at 07:58 AM
the system has plenty of bugs still being worked out.
now you have to call the CBP station and get a verbal ok to come in too in addition to all the other eAPIS protocol.
this is gov't at its worst.
more than a few have said this is too much red tape and they are calling it quits to cross border in their planes.
i have registered but haven't used it yet. not looking forward to having to go thru the exercise either.woody with a view - 5-15-2009 at 08:25 AM
soooo, we should build a wall but let everyone who wants to do so fly over it unannounced?
get with the times, as they are a changin'.dtbushpilot - 5-15-2009 at 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by woody in ob
soooo, we should build a wall but let everyone who wants to do so fly over it unannounced?
get with the times, as they are a changin'.
Well woody, not quite.
There have always been controls in place to identify and track the movements of aircraft crossing both ways. If you don't get it right you can expect
to be intercepted by law enforcement. This system is new and a bit cumbersome and takes a few more minutes to accomplish but it's doable.
One issue that a lot of pilots have with the system is that you must get permission to LEAVE the country now instead of just filing a flight plan.
People fear that "big brother" is tightening the noose. It really isn't a big deal.....yet. There have been grumblings about loss of freedoms in the
name of homeland security. They are all for homeland security as long as it doesn't affect them. We pilots are just like any other demographic, there
are those that will complain and resist just about anything because that's just how they are.
As for me, it's just not that big of a deal. It's a bit more work but easy enough to accomplish even with my limited computer skills. We are fortunate
to have the Baja Bush Pilots working very hard along with the director of the program to make it a more user friendly system. Every pilot that flies
to Baja should be a member. Flying general aviation South of the border would be nearly impossible by now without their efforts.
And you're right on the money about the times Woody, they are a changin and those who don't get with the times will get left behind........some of
them should be....dtcapt. mike - 5-15-2009 at 03:33 PM
well said dt and i agree with most of it, especially how we'd be screwed more without the BBP lobby efforts.
but what craws me is that we as private AC operators are being singled out for this useless security measure - and ground pounders are free to walk
and drive across both ways without all the bureaucratic hoopla.
our heretofore "rights" are gone to freely cross except with permission and notice? no justice in that.
as you said - they already have us on radar, we land at CBP stations. we have passports, we file return ADIZ flt plans, we have the customs sticker.
they have all the tools in place they need to have decent security from law abiding flying citizens - well guess what folks? - the non law abiding
won't follow the rules anyway. this whole new eAPIS was dreamed up by some staffers with nothing better to do than seek praise from their equally
pinheaded supervisors for coming up with more pointless gov't waste and control.
none of this is going to add one measure of safety to the borders.
and - have you read about the new TSA measures at small GA ports planned and in effect already some places?? more ridiculous crapola.
"your papers please?"......... right out of a bad post WWII movie in East Germany......woody with a view - 5-15-2009 at 04:08 PM
thanks for the clarification of two points of view.
it's not too much to ask, is it? a few minutes?
if they ever deny ANYONE leaving the country, heck, even the bin laden family was allowed to LEAVE!!!!
One more reason to resist---
beercan - 5-16-2009 at 06:46 AM
One of your passengers or even you come up on a mistake on that list and you're stuck .
Woody, I registered in December and tried to use their system for practice in late January and they didn't respond--they couldn't get their system to
work for almost a month after I tried , they told me it was my "spam filter"---It takes more than a few minutes.
Ditto for what Mike said . Ground pounders are almost unregulated compared to the flyboys .
Justice Dept. Finds Flaws in F.B.I. Terror List
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON — The Federal Bureau of Investigation has incorrectly kept nearly 24,000 people on a terrorist watch list on the basis of outdated or
sometimes irrelevant information, while missing people with genuine ties to terrorism who should have been on the list, according to a Justice
Department report released Wednesday.
The report said the mistakes posed a risk to national security, because of the failure to flag actual terrorism suspects, and an unnecessary nuisance
for nonsuspects who may be questioned at traffic stops or kept from boarding airplanes.
By the beginning of 2009, the report said, this consolidated government watch list comprised about 400,000 people, recorded as 1.1 million names and
aliases, an exponential growth from the days before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Among the list’s uses is the screening of people entering the country, and intelligence officials say it has allowed agencies to work together to
prevent the type of breakdown that allowed two of the Sept. 11 hijackers to get into the United States even though they were known to the Central
Intelligence Agency for their terrorist ties.
But the new report, by the office of the Justice Department’s inspector general, provides the most authoritative statistical account to date of the
problems connected with the list. An earlier report by the inspector general, released in March 2008, looked mainly at flaws in the system, without an
emphasis on the number of people caught up in it.
The list has long been a target of public criticism, particularly after well-publicized errors in which politicians including Senator Edward M.
Kennedy and Representative John Lewis showed up on it. People with names similar to actual terrorists have complained that it can take months to be
removed from the list, and civil liberties advocates charge that antiwar protesters, Muslim activists and others have been listed for political
reasons.
The new report from the inspector general, Glenn A. Fine, looked mainly at the F.B.I., which took the lead in 2004 for maintaining the newly
consolidated list for all agencies throughout the government.
One of the biggest problems identified in the report was the use of outdated information, or material unconnected to terrorism, to keep people on the
bureau’s own terror watch list, which is incorporated in the consolidated list. The report, examining nearly 69,000 referrals to the F.B.I. list that
were either brought or processed by the bureau, found that 35 percent of those people, both Americans and foreigners, remained on the list despite
inadequate justification.
“Many of these watch-listed records were associated with outdated terrorism case classifications or case classifications unrelated to terrorism,” the
report said.
In some cases, it said, subjects of F.B.I. investigations that had been closed years earlier without action either were never removed from watch lists
or were not removed in a timely fashion.
Potentially even more problematic were the cases of people who were not listed despite evidence of terrorist ties.
The inspector general looked at a sampling of 216 F.B.I. terrorism investigations and found that in 15 percent of them, a total of 35 subjects were
not referred to the list even though they should have been.
In one case, for instance, a Special Forces soldier was investigated and ultimately convicted of stealing some 16,500 rounds of ammunition, C-4
explosives and other matériel from Afghanistan and shipping them to the United States in what investigators suspected might be the makings of a
domestic terrorist plot. Yet the suspect was not placed on the watch list until nearly five months after the investigation opened.
“We believe that the F.B.I.’s failure to consistently nominate subjects of international and domestic terrorism investigations to the terrorist watch
list could pose a risk to national security,” the inspector general said.
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said her group’s monitoring of watch lists
indicated that the problems identified at the F.B.I. were endemic to the entire system.
“What this report really shows is that on both ends, the lists are really overinclusive and underinclusive,” Ms. Fredrickson said in an interview.
“With 1.1 million names, there’s all sorts of problems that have larded it up, and the whole thing just really needs to be torn down and start a new
system.”
The F.B.I. said Wednesday that it had already adopted all 16 of the inspector general’s recommendations for improving watch list operations, including
better training and faster processing of referrals.
The bureau said in a statement that “we remain committed to improving our watch list policy and practices to ensure the proper balance between
national security protection and the need for accurate, efficient and streamlined watch-listing processes.”dtbushpilot - 5-16-2009 at 07:28 AM
Yes beercan, the whole system is a mess.
There are a number of issues with the system that will no doubt be a source of frustration for pilots and homeland security personnel as well. We all
vigorously resisted the new system when we learned it was to be implemented but when we were convinced that the program was absolutely going to happen
the BBP chose to work with the administrators of the program to try to make it work. As pilots who enjoy flying to Mexico it's in our best interest to
work with the dept. of homeland security to try to make it a user friendly system. We're stuck with it for now so try to make the best of it while the
BBP and the AOPA work to get this ridiculous new requirement thrown out.
One would hope that in time the dept. of homeland security will see just what a useless, screwed up system it is and cancel it but I wouldn't count on
that happening any time soon. Our best bet IMHO is to support the BBP and try to make the best of it.
You always have the option to just stay home and teach them a lesson....dtflyfishinPam - 5-16-2009 at 11:51 AM
well they didn't feel extending the trip by one day was worth it and after reading these posts I have to agreedtbushpilot - 5-16-2009 at 02:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by flyfishinPam
well they didn't feel extending the trip by one day was worth it and after reading these posts I have to agree
It can take a few days to get a "sender ID", not always but sometimes. Once you're registered with eapis it takes 20 minutes to file a manifest and
receive an authorization reply (that's if you have limited computer skills like me).
If they are regular Mexico flyer's they should have known about the requirement. If they were BBP members they would have known about it a year ago.
If they had already signed up they could have filed a manifest while they had breakfast at the local internet cafe.
As was mentioned before, pilots have to file an international border crossing flight plan, open the flight plan with a FSS in the US, amend their
arrival time, fill out a 178 form etc. The new procedure is just that, a new way of doing it. It's not as if we had to do nothing before and now we
have to do something.
I find that pilots with a true "Baja spirit" don't have much of an issue with the new system. I, for one won't let it cause me any grief or keep me
from enjoying my Baja flying experience......dt
