Narrative:

The incident in question occurred on jun/xx/96, while on a return flight from london, ontario, canada. I was the PIC of a flight conducted in a beechcraft bonanza that was returning to the united states after visiting the diamond aircraft manufacturing facility in london, canada, where the new katana aircraft is being built. We returned to cak to clear united states customs. Proper notification was given via telephone to the united states customs agent, an IFR flight plan was filed for the instrument flight and both united states citizens onboard had all of the proper documentation in their possession. The problem arose when the customs agent informed us that we were facing a $5000 fine for operating the aircraft internationally without the proper FAA authority/authorized with regards to temporary aircraft registration. The aircraft had just been acquired the week before on jun/xx/96, and had been operating with a temporary registration while the permanent registration was being forwarded by the FAA. Although I fly into canada on a regular basis both VFR and IFR and always take all of the necessary steps to abide by both united states and canadian regulations as applicable, I was entirely unaware of the specific registration requirements with regards to temporary aircraft registrations. I understand the basis and the need for the requirement in criminal cases, however, I believe that a lot more can be done in order to minimize such confusion and misunderstanding. I believe that more should be done to educate the GA pilot with regards to international flts when such harsh penalties are going to be enforced. Likewise, when it is obvious that the intent of the flight was not criminal in nature, and when there is no history of any prior violations or offenses, and when mitigating circumstances do exist, the customs agent should have the authority/authorized to evaluate and decide whether fines and/or charges are warranted and necessary or whether a warning is more appropriate. We did not lie about our intent, we followed all applicable procedures as required by law. We did not try to abuse the system or operate contrary to any law. We are simply guilty of human ignorance and nothing more. $5000 is a hefty penalty to pay for such an education when no criminal, state, federal or local laws were intentionally violated. Since the incident, the proper FAA facsimile authority/authorized for flts into canada has been requested until the permanent registration can be obtained. The pilot group has been contacted and the proper customs notification procedures and regulations manual is being sent for review. Safety to persons or property was never in question. It was, in all honesty, a simple case of lack in understanding of all the united states customs regulations.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CUSTOMS AGENT INFORMED FLC ON RETURN TO UNITED STATES ARPT THAT THEY HAD OPERATED THE ACFT WITH A TEMPORARY ACFT REGISTRATION INTO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND THAT WAS ILLEGAL ACCORDING TO FARS. CUSTOMS THREATENED PENALTY.

Narrative: THE INCIDENT IN QUESTION OCCURRED ON JUN/XX/96, WHILE ON A RETURN FLT FROM LONDON, ONTARIO, CANADA. I WAS THE PIC OF A FLT CONDUCTED IN A BEECHCRAFT BONANZA THAT WAS RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES AFTER VISITING THE DIAMOND ACFT MANUFACTURING FACILITY IN LONDON, CANADA, WHERE THE NEW KATANA ACFT IS BEING BUILT. WE RETURNED TO CAK TO CLR UNITED STATES CUSTOMS. PROPER NOTIFICATION WAS GIVEN VIA TELEPHONE TO THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AGENT, AN IFR FLT PLAN WAS FILED FOR THE INST FLT AND BOTH UNITED STATES CITIZENS ONBOARD HAD ALL OF THE PROPER DOCUMENTATION IN THEIR POSSESSION. THE PROB AROSE WHEN THE CUSTOMS AGENT INFORMED US THAT WE WERE FACING A $5000 FINE FOR OPERATING THE ACFT INTERNATIONALLY WITHOUT THE PROPER FAA AUTH WITH REGARDS TO TEMPORARY ACFT REGISTRATION. THE ACFT HAD JUST BEEN ACQUIRED THE WK BEFORE ON JUN/XX/96, AND HAD BEEN OPERATING WITH A TEMPORARY REGISTRATION WHILE THE PERMANENT REGISTRATION WAS BEING FORWARDED BY THE FAA. ALTHOUGH I FLY INTO CANADA ON A REGULAR BASIS BOTH VFR AND IFR AND ALWAYS TAKE ALL OF THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABIDE BY BOTH UNITED STATES AND CANADIAN REGS AS APPLICABLE, I WAS ENTIRELY UNAWARE OF THE SPECIFIC REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS WITH REGARDS TO TEMPORARY ACFT REGISTRATIONS. I UNDERSTAND THE BASIS AND THE NEED FOR THE REQUIREMENT IN CRIMINAL CASES, HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT A LOT MORE CAN BE DONE IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE SUCH CONFUSION AND MISUNDERSTANDING. I BELIEVE THAT MORE SHOULD BE DONE TO EDUCATE THE GA PLT WITH REGARDS TO INTL FLTS WHEN SUCH HARSH PENALTIES ARE GOING TO BE ENFORCED. LIKEWISE, WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE INTENT OF THE FLT WAS NOT CRIMINAL IN NATURE, AND WHEN THERE IS NO HISTORY OF ANY PRIOR VIOLATIONS OR OFFENSES, AND WHEN MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES DO EXIST, THE CUSTOMS AGENT SHOULD HAVE THE AUTH TO EVALUATE AND DECIDE WHETHER FINES AND/OR CHARGES ARE WARRANTED AND NECESSARY OR WHETHER A WARNING IS MORE APPROPRIATE. WE DID NOT LIE ABOUT OUR INTENT, WE FOLLOWED ALL APPLICABLE PROCS AS REQUIRED BY LAW. WE DID NOT TRY TO ABUSE THE SYS OR OPERATE CONTRARY TO ANY LAW. WE ARE SIMPLY GUILTY OF HUMAN IGNORANCE AND NOTHING MORE. $5000 IS A HEFTY PENALTY TO PAY FOR SUCH AN EDUCATION WHEN NO CRIMINAL, STATE, FEDERAL OR LCL LAWS WERE INTENTIONALLY VIOLATED. SINCE THE INCIDENT, THE PROPER FAA FAX AUTH FOR FLTS INTO CANADA HAS BEEN REQUESTED UNTIL THE PERMANENT REGISTRATION CAN BE OBTAINED. THE PLT GROUP HAS BEEN CONTACTED AND THE PROPER CUSTOMS NOTIFICATION PROCS AND REGS MANUAL IS BEING SENT FOR REVIEW. SAFETY TO PERSONS OR PROPERTY WAS NEVER IN QUESTION. IT WAS, IN ALL HONESTY, A SIMPLE CASE OF LACK IN UNDERSTANDING OF ALL THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS REGS.

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.