Narrative:

I am employed by a port 135 operator to patrol at&T underwater telephone cables from a land based facility near the shoreline to a point approximately 30 NM of shore. The purpose of the patrol is to observe, identify, record and if possible to communication with any marine vessel near the cable locations. Overwater navigation is by LORAN. Prior to departure from home base (sbp) I phoned hawthorne FSS to inquire about the need for, and file if needed, a DVFR flight plan. The FSS specialist didn't believe a DVFR plan was required and said he would confer with 'others' and returned to say DVFR was only required if crossing the USA/mex border and haw FSS hadn't heard of a DVFR over the pacific in a long while. The flight operated VFR, no flight plan, with oak ATC radar advisories until near eni at which time the copilot told ATC that we would descend to low level over the water on patrol and would penetrate the ADIZ. Center acknowledged, said squawk 1200 and call when over land and above 9000'. This was done. During the flight to sbp we were given a phone number to call on arrival at sbp. On arrival we were detained for customs who quickly determined that customs was not concerned and we were released. The af advised that 2 interceptors had been scrambled to intercept us, however, I believe they were called off when it was determined that we were in contact with ATC. There is confusion regarding the need to file ADIZ plans. I thought we needed to file, haw FSS though we did not need to file and could not or would not accept the plan. There apparently is a lack of coordination between the FAA and af. These flts are on going therefore, we feel some urgency in resolving the problems and have requested the assistance of the sjc FSDO in developing a proper method to conduct these flts. We are trying to operate by the rules but everyone involved must know what the rules are. Any assistance you can provide will be appreciated. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information. Reporter stated he was aware of the requirment to file a DVFR flight plan with FSS, and discussed it with FSDO, however, when filing with haw FSS, specialist didn't know how to handle it. Reporter also states there was a recent change in DVFR handling last oct or nov strengthening this requirement. His company had been flying route for approximately 3 yrs with no problem. After landing at sbp, the tower advised the reporter that there were 2 sheriffs deputies in the tower and they wanted to talk to him. Reporter was detained at the aircraft until USA customs arrived. After checking, reporter was released. Company now has a canned DVFR flight plan filed with FSS and no other problems have occurred since then. Reporter still thinks ATC does not know how to handle odd ball routing and has to explain what he's doing each time. Analyst gave name and phone number of ZOA for briefing.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA ON TELEPHONE LINE PATROL OVER OCEAN PENETRATES ADIZ CAUSING REACTION FROM MIL.

Narrative: I AM EMPLOYED BY A PORT 135 OPERATOR TO PATROL AT&T UNDERWATER TELEPHONE CABLES FROM A LAND BASED FAC NEAR THE SHORELINE TO A POINT APPROX 30 NM OF SHORE. THE PURPOSE OF THE PATROL IS TO OBSERVE, IDENT, RECORD AND IF POSSIBLE TO COM WITH ANY MARINE VESSEL NEAR THE CABLE LOCATIONS. OVERWATER NAV IS BY LORAN. PRIOR TO DEP FROM HOME BASE (SBP) I PHONED HAWTHORNE FSS TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE NEED FOR, AND FILE IF NEEDED, A DVFR FLT PLAN. THE FSS SPECIALIST DIDN'T BELIEVE A DVFR PLAN WAS REQUIRED AND SAID HE WOULD CONFER WITH 'OTHERS' AND RETURNED TO SAY DVFR WAS ONLY REQUIRED IF XING THE USA/MEX BORDER AND HAW FSS HADN'T HEARD OF A DVFR OVER THE PACIFIC IN A LONG WHILE. THE FLT OPERATED VFR, NO FLT PLAN, WITH OAK ATC RADAR ADVISORIES UNTIL NEAR ENI AT WHICH TIME THE COPLT TOLD ATC THAT WE WOULD DSND TO LOW LEVEL OVER THE WATER ON PATROL AND WOULD PENETRATE THE ADIZ. CTR ACKNOWLEDGED, SAID SQUAWK 1200 AND CALL WHEN OVER LAND AND ABOVE 9000'. THIS WAS DONE. DURING THE FLT TO SBP WE WERE GIVEN A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL ON ARR AT SBP. ON ARR WE WERE DETAINED FOR CUSTOMS WHO QUICKLY DETERMINED THAT CUSTOMS WAS NOT CONCERNED AND WE WERE RELEASED. THE AF ADVISED THAT 2 INTERCEPTORS HAD BEEN SCRAMBLED TO INTERCEPT US, HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THEY WERE CALLED OFF WHEN IT WAS DETERMINED THAT WE WERE IN CONTACT WITH ATC. THERE IS CONFUSION REGARDING THE NEED TO FILE ADIZ PLANS. I THOUGHT WE NEEDED TO FILE, HAW FSS THOUGH WE DID NOT NEED TO FILE AND COULD NOT OR WOULD NOT ACCEPT THE PLAN. THERE APPARENTLY IS A LACK OF COORD BTWN THE FAA AND AF. THESE FLTS ARE ON GOING THEREFORE, WE FEEL SOME URGENCY IN RESOLVING THE PROBS AND HAVE REQUESTED THE ASSISTANCE OF THE SJC FSDO IN DEVELOPING A PROPER METHOD TO CONDUCT THESE FLTS. WE ARE TRYING TO OPERATE BY THE RULES BUT EVERYONE INVOLVED MUST KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE. ANY ASSISTANCE YOU CAN PROVIDE WILL BE APPRECIATED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO. RPTR STATED HE WAS AWARE OF THE REQUIRMENT TO FILE A DVFR FLT PLAN WITH FSS, AND DISCUSSED IT WITH FSDO, HOWEVER, WHEN FILING WITH HAW FSS, SPECIALIST DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE IT. RPTR ALSO STATES THERE WAS A RECENT CHANGE IN DVFR HANDLING LAST OCT OR NOV STRENGTHENING THIS REQUIREMENT. HIS COMPANY HAD BEEN FLYING ROUTE FOR APPROX 3 YRS WITH NO PROB. AFTER LNDG AT SBP, THE TWR ADVISED THE RPTR THAT THERE WERE 2 SHERIFFS DEPUTIES IN THE TWR AND THEY WANTED TO TALK TO HIM. RPTR WAS DETAINED AT THE ACFT UNTIL USA CUSTOMS ARRIVED. AFTER CHKING, RPTR WAS RELEASED. COMPANY NOW HAS A CANNED DVFR FLT PLAN FILED WITH FSS AND NO OTHER PROBS HAVE OCCURRED SINCE THEN. RPTR STILL THINKS ATC DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO HANDLE ODD BALL RTING AND HAS TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE'S DOING EACH TIME. ANALYST GAVE NAME AND PHONE NUMBER OF ZOA FOR BRIEFING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.