Volunteer Pilot for Law Enforcement/Surveillance

[DireVindex]

Denny, this one's likely for you...

What restrictions apply to private pilots that make themselves available to volunteer their skills and aircraft to a law enforcement agency in a surveillance capacity?

This will be a fixed-wing aircraft operating under VFR with an observer and some light hand held equipment.

Would a county fuel voucher be considered compensation, requiring a commercial certificate?

Also, as the pilot in command, please confirm that I have the authority to dictate how a firearm is carried within the aircraft, i.e. no round in the chamber for autoloaders and hammer resting on an empty chamber for revolvers.

Thank you in advance.

[Denny of Oakland]

I know the short answer, but give me a few days to come up with the whole story.

Denny of Oakland

[Denny of Oakland]

First, commercial certificate requirement. A legal interpretation 10/23/1997 Requesting An Interpretation Of What Is Considered Compensation Under Section 61.113 Of The FAR,Contd.

You ask whether private pilots that make themselves available to volunteer their skills and aircraft to a law enforcement agency in a surveillance capacity is considered compensation under section 61.113, and whether the above flying activities are permissible if the pilot volunteer holds either a private pilot certificate. The answers to these questions are discussed below based on a FAA legal brief.

Section 61.113 sets forth the privileges and limitations of the holder of a private pilot certificate. That section states, in pertinent part, that a person who holds a private pilot certificate may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft. Section 61.113 does provide for exceptions to the above (incidental business activity, expense sharing, charitable airlifts, search and location missions, glider towing), however, none of the exceptions are applicable based on the facts presented in your letter.

Section 61.133 (14 CFR 61.133) sets forth the privileges and limitations of the holder of a commercial pilot certificate. That section states, in pertinent part, that a person who holds a commercial pilot certificate and who is qualified in accordance with this part and with the applicable parts of this chapter that apply to the operation, may act as pilot in command of an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire; and that person may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

Section 61.23 (14 CFR 61.23) sets forth the medical certificate requirements (first-class, second-class, third-class, or no medical certificate) when conducting various pilot operations. That section states, in pertinent part, that a person must hold at least a second-class medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate and at least a third-class medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate.

In order for a person to act as pilot in command of an aircraft for compensation or hire, a pilot must have at least a commercial pilot certificate and a second-class medical certificate. If no compensation or hire is involved, then a person may act as pilot in command of an aircraft with a private pilot certificate and a third-class medical certificate.

In determining what is considered compensation, it has been the FAA's long-standing policy to define compensation in very broad terms. For example, any reimbursement of expenses (fuel, oil, transportation, lodging, meals, etc.), if conditioned upon the pilot operating the aircraft, would constitute compensation. In addition, the building up of flight time may be compensatory in nature if the pilot does not have to pay the costs of operating the aircraft. While it could be argued that the accumulation of flight time is not always of value to the pilot involved, the FAA does not consider it appropriate to enter into a case-by-case analysis to determine whether the logging of time is of value to a particular pilot, or what the pilot's motives or intentions are on each flight.

Thus, to the extent that the pilot is compensated for fuel and oil for the media rides, logging flight time could also be considered compensation. So to answer your question a commercial certificate is required.

Second, firearms onboard aircraft CFR’s part 107.21 part 108 cover most of your question, Airport Security (Historical only - Replaced by Title 49 Part 1540/1542).

You may want to explain to passenger who arranges for legal carriage of firearms at the airports of departure and destination might find himself liable at intermediate stops. However, he is, and always was, responsible at these intermediate stops for complying with State and local laws. The regulation does not prohibit any activity that is not presently proscribed. The FAA believes a necessary element in the protection of persons traveling in air transportation and in intrastate air transportation is the elimination of unlawful carriage of weapons on every part of the airport. Therefore, the proposed regulations would merely utilize existing State and local laws to meet this objective.

Certificate holders (part 121 and 135), without regard to screening, may not knowingly allow carriage of loaded firearms in checked baggage. Individuals are also prohibited from such carriage by FAR Part 108 and FAR Section 902(1) of the FAAct.

Requirements concerning the carriage of firearms in checked baggage, such as elimination of the need to transport shotguns and sports rifles in locked containers, adding the requirement to secure handguns in locked containers, and establishment of the requirement to declare firearms in checked baggage. An additional amendment was issued with an effective date of March 31, 1980, removing prohibitions against carriage of weapons aboard civil aircraft by military personnel provided the aircraft is ruder charter or contract to the armed forces of the Government of the United States and involves only full plane loads of military personnel.

Section 108.11(d) establishes procedures for carriage of unloaded firearms in checked baggage. These procedures include a passenger declaration to the certificate holder that the firearm is unloaded and assurance that the firearm is carried in a container the certificate holder considers appropriate. Many such containers manufactured specifically for firearms transportation are commercially available. The procedures further provide that where the firearm is other than a shotgun or rifle, the baggage in whìch it is carried must be locked with the passenger retaining the key or combination. All such baggage must be carried in an area inaccessible to passengers and never may be carried in the flight crew compartment.

The bottom line is inaccessible to passengers and as pilot in command it is your duty to dictate.

Denny of Oakland

[11B]

SO a lqw enforcemnt official can not carry their department firearm with them on a flight under part 91.

Also what part does flying for law enforcement fall under if they offer to pay for the use of your aircraft and or your time. is this a charter flight then even if you take off an dland form the same airport or is it considered air tours or something else?

[DireVindex]

Having been a police officer, and knowing what the laws of the State of Texas are, I can attest competently that a police officer acting in official discharge of his/her duties is allowed and required to carry a firearm anywhere the state has jurisdiction. This includes all civilian airports that fall within the political boundaries of the State of Texas. A police officer that is not acting in official capacity is allowed to carry anywhere in the state and, most of the time, required to carry within the boundaries served by the department that they are employed by. If the aircraft is owned by the city, then FAA regulations only serve to regulate who acts as pilot, and under what conditions the individual operating the aircraft can do so (notwithstanding, it also regulates how such employed aircraft can be equipped). The FAA furthermore, from what I can glean from what Denny has said, is only interested in enhancing the existing laws respective to each state, regarding general firearm carry where commercial aviation is concerned.

The main concern I was trying to have addressed was whether I would have to pay for the fuel and the aircraft.

The issue of dictating how I allowed a firearm to be carried by authorized persons was a separate, though no less important issue born out of a concern for safety. I would be flying out of a municipal airport, and flying countywide surveillance, so there wouldn't be much of an issue regarding interjurisdiction. The main concern is that, regardless of how many safety features are designed into a modern firearm, 10,000 feet, or 200 feet for that matter, is no place to find out how reliable (or unreliable) a given feature might be, plus, a police officer is not going to be discharging a firearm from the aircraft. Therefore, a pilot in command has to be given wide latitude on dictating what goes on in his/her aircraft. Afterall, it is he or she who will ultimately be held responsible for the safe operation of that craft.

Please correct me if I've erred, Denny.

[Denny of Oakland]

I asked the question to several pilots my district office about carrying guns and volunteering your aircraft, should of known better than ask more than one pilot. However, the consciences was the PIC is the one who makes the call on who carries a firearm and how. If you are flying a public use aircraft none of this matters.

Second, was whether you would have to pay for the fuel and the aircraft. The technical answer is yes, if you were ramped by an FAA inspector. However, there has been a change of thinking at the FAA in some regions and the FAA has agreed to allow you to accept payment for fuel used in your aircraft. Here in our region is has been allowed for the search and rescue teams using private aircraft to accept payment for fuel. However, I can not speak for the entire nation, I would suggest your contact your local FSDO.

As I understand it Washington DC in taking up the matter and a public notice is to be published allowing for payment of fuel. Until then contact your local FSDO.

Denny

[DireVindex]

As always, Denny, I appreciate your input. Don'tcha ever get tired of all the questions? LOL! Here's your "warm-fuzzy"...

You da man!

[Denny of Oakland]

Your tax dollars at work get your money's worth. I just think as a civil servant we should be held to a higher standard since it is your taxes that support us in the government. And since we are spending your money you as a taxpayer should demand to get what you are paying for. If more civil servants thought like me we could do with less of them. Just venting just got my California tax bill.

Denny of Oakland
Simper Fi