 |
Advance information requirements for international General Aviation flights – government response |
The Government have published the consultation response for the consultation General Aviation: Advance information requirements for international flights.
It covers:
- the background to the consultation
- a summary of the consultation responses
- the government’s proposals and next steps
The full response can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/advance-information-requirements-for-international-general-aviation-flights/outcome/advance-information-requirements-for-international-general-aviation-flights-government-response
The Home Office received 199 responses to the public consultation: 184 were received using the online smart survey and 15 were received by email.
The consultation was targeted to GA trade bodies and associations as well as to other government departments and agencies. The majority of responses were submitted by individual leisure pilots, with around 10% from business and commercial GA operators. Responses were also received from Counter-Terrorism Border Policing, the National Crime Agency and the Department for Transport. All feedback was analysed for common themes of support and concerns raised about the proposed regulations.
Government response Summary:
The government is grateful for the feedback and suggestions received from all respondents on the consultation. The valuable contribution GA makes to the aviation sector and the wider UK economy has been noted.
Whilst we endeavour to keep the regulatory burden on the GA sector to a minimum, this must be sufficiently balanced with border security and law enforcement needs. It is of paramount importance that API is received in a manner that enables automatic border checks to take place and for pre-departure action to be taken.
The government proposes to introduce regulations requiring information about international GA flights and persons on board and for that information to be provided online and in advance of departure for all international flights to and from the UK (including within the CTA). Reflecting feedback from consultation respondents the government proposes the information be submitted no earlier than 48 hours and no later than 2 hours prior to departure to or from the UK.
The regulations will be underpinned by a civil penalty regime where a maximum penalty of up to £10,000 may be issued for non-compliance.
Summary of next steps
In response to the consultation the government is committed to:
- Making technical enhancements to the sGAR portal to improve user experience.
- Developing a robust civil penalty process and publishing clear guidance on its operation for leisure pilots, GA owners and GA operators.
- Establishing and publishing a clear process for reporting delayed GA flights or those having to report in exceptional circumstances.
AOPA has during the discussions promoted the need for a simple , seamless system that provides the necessary information with the least amount of inconvenience given that 99.9% of our members are law abiding citizens.
Like the US ESTA system, Europe and the UK have been developing their own policy and systems.The UK Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) system is scheduled to be fully operational by the end of 2024, while the European system, ETIAS,is scheduled to be operational from mid-2025.
Some of the points raised and Government responses:
Information required about flights and persons on board
Respondents were asked about the information that would be required in respect of flights and persons on board.
Most respondents commented the information is similar to what is already included in GAR and there would be no impact.
Concerns were raised over the duplication of data requirements with flight plans and the consideration given to introducing a single requirement encompassing the flight plan and API.
Some respondents noted not all airfield locations have an ICAO code and alternative options other than LAT/ LONG should be made available, given the scope for error with latitude and longitude and the consequences of such errors.
Government response
Whilst a flight plan includes information about the flight, it does not include – and does not need include – the API fields relating to persons on board. As such reliance upon the flight plan would be insufficient for border security and law enforcement purposes and adding details of all persons onboard to the flight plan is unnecessary for flight planning purposes.
The government is committed to making reporting as straightforward as possible. We are considering the feasibility of using additional applications such as ‘What Three Words’ to assist with identifying locations where there is no ICAO code.
Reporting notification period
Respondents were asked for their views on the proposed requirement that API be submitted no earlier than 24 hours and no later than 2 hours before departure.
Whilst a number of respondents felt the timing requirements were reasonable, there were some concerns that the proposed timings would not allow for last minute changes. Some respondents asked for more flexible timing requirements enabling API to be submitted within 2 hours of departure and more than 24 hours before departure.
Law enforcement agencies also noted concerns about their ability, when necessary, to reach remote GA locations within 2 hours of GA flights departing from the UK.
Government response
Within the timing requirements there is a need to balance the operational constraints of Border Force and other law enforcement agencies with flexibility for GA pilots, owners and operators. In order to fully assess each international GA flight and when necessary deploy to meet it, a minimum of 2 hours is required. Therefore, the timing requirement cannot be less than 2 hours.
However, after noting the suggestions that API be submitted earlier than 24 hours, the government is content to extend the timing requirement to a maximum of 48 hours prior to departure. This would also give law enforcement agencies additional time to analyse the API received.
Online submission of Advance Passenger Information (API)
Respondents were asked about submitting API online using portals or applications and if there would be any practical implications of doing so.
The majority felt that applications and portals were a sensible method for submitting API, providing the systems were robust and could ingest high volumes of submissions.
In the event of a technical issue, respondents mentioned the requirement to have a fallback method such as telephone or email.
Concerns were also raised about submitting API online from remote GA airfields without reliable internet connectivity or where the pilot was unable to access mobile data.
Government response
There is an existing manual reporting process for submission in the event of technical failure. Details can be found on: General Aviation Report (GAR) Guidance – April 2023[footnote 1]. The government is in the process of reviewing this and will publish updated guidance in due course.
As API can be submitted in advance of departure, should pilots be concerned about a lack of internet access at remote airfields they should submit the information in advance when they do have internet access.
Submit a GAR (sGAR) Portal
Respondents were asked to give their views on the government’s sGAR portal.
A large number of respondents stated they had not used sGAR due to already using existing third-party applications connected to Home Office systems.
Of those who have used sGAR, feedback was generally good, with the service being referred to as “an excellent service” and one which met their needs.
There was some criticism that sGAR was not user-friendly, for example, because it requires users to acquire a short validity log-in token. A number of respondents reported issues with Border Force being unable to locate GARs that had been submitted using the system.
There were further suggestions on how the system could be improved. It was said the sGAR log in process should be adapted to enable easier log-in; users should be able to amend the information submitted (instead of cancelling and resubmitting), and the receipt confirmation must be clear which flight it relates to.
Government response
All government systems hosted on gov.uk are required to pass an extensive assessment process and adhere to design principles in order to be government Digital Systems compliant. This process ensures that government systems are fully accessible and efficient.
The issues around GAR submissions have been noted and a review of internal operational processes is taking place. This will ensure all GARs submitted using s-GAR are identified and actioned by the relevant Border Force region.
Having reviewed and considered sGAR users’ experiences, the government has committed to making the following enhancements to the sGAR system:
- enabling users to log-in either using the existing token or, creating a character password
- adding a function to give pilots, owners and operators the ability to amend existing GARs for upcoming flights
- including flight details in GAR receipts making it easier to distinguish between GARs
The Authority to Carry Scheme
Respondents were asked for their views on the implications of operating the Authority to Carry (ATC) Scheme 2023[footnote 2] in respect of international GA flights.
There were concerns over how and when communications of refusals of authority to carry would be made and received by the responsible person. They felt an email or a telephone call should be used to communicate ATC refusal notifications as some airfields have no internet connection, impacting a refusal being received.
Government response
The Authority to Carry Scheme 2023 applies to international GA flights and where API is available GA operators have been refused authority to carry individuals to the UK when necessary. In the event an individual in scope of the Scheme is identified a phone call is made and an email is sent to the responsible person informing them that the individual should not be carried to (or from) the UK. The Authority to Carry Scheme 2023 also applies where the responsible person has not sought authority to carry all passengers and crew on board the flight to (or from) the UK. In both circumstances, under the Authority to Carry Scheme (Civil Penalties) Regulations 2015 the responsible person may be liable to a civil penalty of up to £50,000.
Reporting in exceptional circumstances
Respondents were asked how the reporting requirement should operate in exceptional circumstances. Suggestions ranged from a 24/7 telephone line or text service/email address to report changes to GARs, through to making changes to the sGAR or equivalent apps to allow pilots to report changes in circumstances.
Government response
As noted above, there is an existing process for reporting in exceptional circumstances. However, the government is reviewing this guidance and will publish an updated process in due course.
The 12-hour notification period under paragraph 12 of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000
Respondents were asked for views on the impact of the 12-hour notification period under paragraph 12 of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 (‘TACT’).
Whilst there was a general consensus that the TACT notification requirement for international GA flights within the Common Travel Area, and for domestic flights between Great Britain and Northern Ireland and providing advance notification to authorities is a sensible requirement to have in place. The majority of respondents suggested that the timing requirement should be reviewed before any new regulations are implemented with a view to aligning the timing requirements.
Some respondents noted the 12-hour TACT notification drives perverse flying behaviours, such as pilots flying to the UK from the Channel Islands via France to avoid the TACT notification prior to departure.
A number of concerns were raised around the risks the timing of the TACT notification requirement posed to flight safety. Due to weather patterns quickly changing, the final ‘go/no-go’ decision is made closer to departure. Some respondents felt that attempting to comply with the TACT notification in bad weather could lead to flying in dangerous conditions.
Government response
The government is committed to amending the requirement in paragraph 12 of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 and will provide further updates on this in due course.
Alternative approaches
Respondents were asked for their views on alternative approaches to securing the border and managing vulnerabilities relating to international GA flights. Suggestions included:
- requiring all aircraft making international flights to carry a correctly configured and transmitting transponder
- categorising all flights by aircraft weight. For example, a microlight is unable to transport significant weight (drugs or people) but larger aircraft have more capability and should require closer attention from the authorities
Government response
The government welcomes the alternative solutions put forward by respondents. These are suggestions that will be considered and shared with DfT and may assist in developing our intelligence picture of international GA.