DOJ 12-5 rule
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Wish mom would say
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DOJ 12-5 rule
I have not been here for a long time.
Has there been any discussions about the problems for a non US citizen to get an initial rating in the US on an A/C weighing 12 500 lbs or more?
Has there been any discussions about the problems for a non US citizen to get an initial rating in the US on an A/C weighing 12 500 lbs or more?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In "BIG SKY".
Age: 84
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12,500lb & up training
Contact your proposed training provider and they have a process to get you security cleared and on your way. Provided you qualify of course.
Keep it clean side up!
Keep it clean side up!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LimeRock
From what I understand, there are indeed BIG problems with regard to non-US citizens. At one particular airline that I know about, the delay getting the guys DOJ approved has stretched to two months+, with LOTS of paperwork.
Suspect this will not change all that soon.
A rather sad situation if you ask me.
From what I understand, there are indeed BIG problems with regard to non-US citizens. At one particular airline that I know about, the delay getting the guys DOJ approved has stretched to two months+, with LOTS of paperwork.
Suspect this will not change all that soon.
A rather sad situation if you ask me.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are details regarding the 12-5 rule? Does it apply to training in general or only if you are getting typed? Is the TSA in charge of it? Their website did say anything about it.
MidnightMike,
Do you know what type of impact this is having on training centers such as Long Beach? I understand that the Chinese cancelled their training contract and that the Saudis are quite close of doing the same?
Mutt.
Do you know what type of impact this is having on training centers such as Long Beach? I understand that the Chinese cancelled their training contract and that the Saudis are quite close of doing the same?
Mutt.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutt
Disaster! We have to turn down the training down if the crews are not 12,500 qualified, boy have we lost some money.
The other problem that we are still having is visas! The Saudi crews, no matter what we do, can not get visas. We just cancelled another class and ALL of these crews were cleared through the Department of Justice for training and were qualified in an aircraft 12,500 pounds, I believe the boys were flying the Airbus, 747 & the 777.
As far as the Chinese, we moved the MD90 simulator over to China, since for the past "2" years only the Chinese have used the simulator. Same problem though with the Chinese and the 12,500 rule, we had to turn the boys down, and even the crews that were qualified they needed about 90 days to get visas.
Not a good year for the training centers.
Midnight Mike
Mutt, my email address is [email protected] if you need more info
Disaster! We have to turn down the training down if the crews are not 12,500 qualified, boy have we lost some money.
The other problem that we are still having is visas! The Saudi crews, no matter what we do, can not get visas. We just cancelled another class and ALL of these crews were cleared through the Department of Justice for training and were qualified in an aircraft 12,500 pounds, I believe the boys were flying the Airbus, 747 & the 777.
As far as the Chinese, we moved the MD90 simulator over to China, since for the past "2" years only the Chinese have used the simulator. Same problem though with the Chinese and the 12,500 rule, we had to turn the boys down, and even the crews that were qualified they needed about 90 days to get visas.
Not a good year for the training centers.
Midnight Mike
Mutt, my email address is [email protected] if you need more info
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little story ...
called the TSA on Monday. Didn't realize that it was Veteran's Day. Was told that "someone" will return my call.
called the local FSDO on Tuesday. After talking to the second person I get cut off immediately saying "that's a TSA thing".
called the local TSA. Person on the line doesn't know anything about "a 12-5 rule" and says that it is not implemented yet, and that it is actually an FAA thing.
called Flight Safety in NJ. Second person (lady with a very nice voice) tells me, that for the background check you need to present the following details:
*dob
*country of citizenship
*passport number
She added that the background check by the DOJ takes 3-4 DAYS.
That's what I was told ...
7 7 7 7
called the TSA on Monday. Didn't realize that it was Veteran's Day. Was told that "someone" will return my call.
called the local FSDO on Tuesday. After talking to the second person I get cut off immediately saying "that's a TSA thing".
called the local TSA. Person on the line doesn't know anything about "a 12-5 rule" and says that it is not implemented yet, and that it is actually an FAA thing.
called Flight Safety in NJ. Second person (lady with a very nice voice) tells me, that for the background check you need to present the following details:
*dob
*country of citizenship
*passport number
She added that the background check by the DOJ takes 3-4 DAYS.
That's what I was told ...
7 7 7 7
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Wish mom would say
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there 7777,
the odd thing is that there are different stories depending on who you speak to.
According to Flight Safety, Kansas, and Simuflite the law states that you can not get an initial ( initial being the key word) rating above 12 5 in the US- if you are a non US citizen that is.
If you already hold such a rating, it is however no problems and you will get eligable for what is called expedited processing which is an approval to get training in the US.
I have also been in contact with the NBAA who, on http://www.nbaa.org/ops/security/training/ , has several documents that one can download. In the FTCCP folder it states clearly that one can not train in the US (unless the above is taken care of).
I have however been told that there might be a change in this law and that they want it to say that pilots, non US, who already holds a commercial certificate are qualified for this training.
The changing of this law can be followed on the US Office of Management and Budget homepage, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/index.html, the problem though is that there is no time limit envolved.
A government affairs officer at Flight Safety says that this change might come in two days or two months- so it is hard to say when it comes in effect.
I hope that all my efforts into this proves wrong, meaning that there is no obstacle, but unfortunately I think they hold up.
I can not see why FS would turn down pilots/money when they should be making a profit in what I think is a problem area for them.
I guess I am trying to say that the persons you came in contact with might not understand the situation as it really is.
I have a bunch of lengthy law documents that I have downloaded to find a loophole, but there does not seem to be one.
If I prove to be wrong please let me know, I would love to go over and get a rating.
Best regards, L R
the odd thing is that there are different stories depending on who you speak to.
According to Flight Safety, Kansas, and Simuflite the law states that you can not get an initial ( initial being the key word) rating above 12 5 in the US- if you are a non US citizen that is.
If you already hold such a rating, it is however no problems and you will get eligable for what is called expedited processing which is an approval to get training in the US.
I have also been in contact with the NBAA who, on http://www.nbaa.org/ops/security/training/ , has several documents that one can download. In the FTCCP folder it states clearly that one can not train in the US (unless the above is taken care of).
I have however been told that there might be a change in this law and that they want it to say that pilots, non US, who already holds a commercial certificate are qualified for this training.
The changing of this law can be followed on the US Office of Management and Budget homepage, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/index.html, the problem though is that there is no time limit envolved.
A government affairs officer at Flight Safety says that this change might come in two days or two months- so it is hard to say when it comes in effect.
I hope that all my efforts into this proves wrong, meaning that there is no obstacle, but unfortunately I think they hold up.
I can not see why FS would turn down pilots/money when they should be making a profit in what I think is a problem area for them.
I guess I am trying to say that the persons you came in contact with might not understand the situation as it really is.
I have a bunch of lengthy law documents that I have downloaded to find a loophole, but there does not seem to be one.
If I prove to be wrong please let me know, I would love to go over and get a rating.
Best regards, L R
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just heard from a friend of mine, that partly because of the 12-5 rules some fractionals (FJ, CS) are only interviewing candidates that are US citizens. I wonder if that is legal ....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Wish mom would say
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not know anything about the legal part of it all, but since they have a law prohibiting non US citizens even getting an opportunity to train I guess they can justify that too.
I have heard that the OMB has said for two months that they will put out a final rule to all this "very soon". I guess that the red tape makes "very soon" a definition of interpretation.
Another rumour says that the industry hopes for a change the first week of December- but this is also a rumour, and an aviation rumour at that!
I have heard that the OMB has said for two months that they will put out a final rule to all this "very soon". I guess that the red tape makes "very soon" a definition of interpretation.
Another rumour says that the industry hopes for a change the first week of December- but this is also a rumour, and an aviation rumour at that!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lime Rock - there's something strange about all this... As far as I know (and I could be wrong of course) NetJets Europe sends some of their new hires for training to the US. Not sure, if the NetJets Europe fleet is N-registered, etc. but it might be worthwhile finding those "details" out.
Another solution to the problem is to write to the DOJ via certified or registered mail and ask them to give you a security clearance ahead of your "potential" interview date. Just argue that the background check is worth 10 negative points on the interview and that you feel unfairly discriminated. I don't see wht they should not be able to give you a green light ahead of time. THen you have a written "clearance" by the DoJ which you can present on your job interview. As far as I have read and understood the whole bureaucratic process, you should expect an answer within 45 days. In addition, if you demonstrate a good presentation of your previous flying exams - theory and practical - it should aid in speeding up the process. The hijackers that were involved with the Sept 11 attacks were not really standing out for their good grades - as far as I am informed.
Good Luck
7 7 7 7
Edited:
I read the "Interim Final Rule and Proposed Rule" again, and I haven't found where it prohibits foreign nationals who don't qualify for the expedited process to undertake flight training. Read it carefully, it start with "no person may ... conduct training ..., unless ..." So, as far as I understand things right now, you are exposed to a 45 day waiting period...
Another solution to the problem is to write to the DOJ via certified or registered mail and ask them to give you a security clearance ahead of your "potential" interview date. Just argue that the background check is worth 10 negative points on the interview and that you feel unfairly discriminated. I don't see wht they should not be able to give you a green light ahead of time. THen you have a written "clearance" by the DoJ which you can present on your job interview. As far as I have read and understood the whole bureaucratic process, you should expect an answer within 45 days. In addition, if you demonstrate a good presentation of your previous flying exams - theory and practical - it should aid in speeding up the process. The hijackers that were involved with the Sept 11 attacks were not really standing out for their good grades - as far as I am informed.
Good Luck
7 7 7 7
Edited:
I read the "Interim Final Rule and Proposed Rule" again, and I haven't found where it prohibits foreign nationals who don't qualify for the expedited process to undertake flight training. Read it carefully, it start with "no person may ... conduct training ..., unless ..." So, as far as I understand things right now, you are exposed to a 45 day waiting period...
Last edited by Squawk7777; 26th Nov 2002 at 10:52.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Wish mom would say
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi 7777,
strange indeed! I have written, but yet no reply, to the DOJ and asked them to clarify the matter for me.
Today I am planning to add to my phone bill until I get a good answer to all this.
The thing is that I have the job already, but can not train in order for me to get the AC in my certificate.
The owner of the AC has previously had crews to Flight Safety and really feels that they do a good job in teaching and therefore wants me to go there too.
If everything else fails, IŽll just get the training/rating in the AC itself.
IŽll let you know how things develop so we have an opportunity to give good advice to anyone else in this situation.
Have a great day.
LR
strange indeed! I have written, but yet no reply, to the DOJ and asked them to clarify the matter for me.
Today I am planning to add to my phone bill until I get a good answer to all this.
The thing is that I have the job already, but can not train in order for me to get the AC in my certificate.
The owner of the AC has previously had crews to Flight Safety and really feels that they do a good job in teaching and therefore wants me to go there too.
If everything else fails, IŽll just get the training/rating in the AC itself.
IŽll let you know how things develop so we have an opportunity to give good advice to anyone else in this situation.
Have a great day.
LR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Wish mom would say
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feels like I am replying to myself here.
Spoke to DOT and they confirmed the fact that I can not train as it is right now. According to them, it sounded like the change MIGHT come this spring.
Well well.
Spoke to DOT and they confirmed the fact that I can not train as it is right now. According to them, it sounded like the change MIGHT come this spring.
Well well.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: LHR
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spring ? In terms of training , this must be hurting an already fragile economy .
Reading the DoJ documents , can anyone clarify the difference between a U.S. Citizen & a National ? This discrimination theory is something that worries me because I'm not convinced that many operators are looking at the detail of the rule hence lean toward the easy option of only interviewing citizens - & there are plenty of them to choose from .
But hey , when in Rome ...
Reading the DoJ documents , can anyone clarify the difference between a U.S. Citizen & a National ? This discrimination theory is something that worries me because I'm not convinced that many operators are looking at the detail of the rule hence lean toward the easy option of only interviewing citizens - & there are plenty of them to choose from .
But hey , when in Rome ...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the June 14 proposal is published on the Flight Safety website (only place I could find it) and my reading of it agrees with squawk7777 in that, you can have expedited approval for training if you are already rated ... (i.e. can begin training upon receipt/acknowledgement of notification of basic details to DOJ through email/web page)
but are exposed to a DOJ 45-day background check if it is initial training.
I hope all the confusion gets sorted out by the time I need a KingAir rating ...
but are exposed to a DOJ 45-day background check if it is initial training.
I hope all the confusion gets sorted out by the time I need a KingAir rating ...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: LHR
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But 28 CFR Part 105 actually states that at that time no other individuals than those listed have been specified for security screening - meaning that unless already rated , you are not yet eligible for a background check .
Or have I misinterpreted it ?
Or have I misinterpreted it ?
Kabz -
I checked the FAA.gov website and other sites. It appears that in your case, you should be okay, unless the information below has been made outdated (it comes from the DOJ interim ruling of June of this year). It says specifically:
So, since you're already a legal permanent resident (i.e. permanent green-card holder) it appears that you are not subject to the same rules that a visiting foreign national is subject to.
I'm still trying to search and find out if this information is still current. However, every publication I've seen so far has this same notation.
If anyone has found more recent information which contradicts what I've said, please post here.
I checked the FAA.gov website and other sites. It appears that in your case, you should be okay, unless the information below has been made outdated (it comes from the DOJ interim ruling of June of this year). It says specifically:
Legal Permanent Residents of the U.S. are not subject to the requirements ...
I'm still trying to search and find out if this information is still current. However, every publication I've seen so far has this same notation.
If anyone has found more recent information which contradicts what I've said, please post here.