PLT RPT; B737; MIA-TPA. CUSTOMER SVC TRIED TO BOARD PRISONER WITH GUARDS WITHOUT CAPT'S PERMISSION; FAR 108 PT 11. CAPT REPRIMANDED AGENT. PAX RESEATED.

Date: 2000-04 · Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model · Phase: ground

Synopsis

PLT RPT; B737; MIA-TPA. CUSTOMER SVC TRIED TO BOARD PRISONER WITH GUARDS WITHOUT CAPT'S PERMISSION; FAR 108 PT 11. CAPT REPRIMANDED AGENT. PAX RESEATED.

Narrative

I HAD TO PULL THE TRIP'S PAPERWORK FROM GATE X. PAX WERE LOADING WHEN I WENT TO THE ACFT. THE AGENT WAS AHEAD OF ME WITH 2 FORMS. OBVIOUSLY; I HAD NOT BEEN INFORMED PRIOR TO BOARDING THAT; ACCORDING TO THE FORMS; WE WERE TRANSPORTING A MAX RISK PRISONER WITH 2 ARMED ESCORTS. IN DISCUSSING THE MATTER WITH AGENT; SHE FIRST TRIED TO TELL ME SHE HAD GIVEN THE FORMS TO THE CAPT. SINCE I WAS THE CAPT; I TOLD HER THAT WAS IMPOSSIBLE. SHE THEN SAID SHE HAD GIVEN THEM TO THE FE; WHICH I ALSO TOLD HER WE DID NOT HAVE ON A B737. HAVING ESTABLISHED SOME CREDIBILITY; I ASKED WHY PART 1; SECTION 13; PARAGRAPH 1.18 F (FAR 108.11) (CAPT NOTIFIED BY AGENT BEFORE BOARDING ARMED PAX) WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. INITIALLY; SHE SAID SHE KNEW THIS AND HAD COMPLIED; UNTIL I POINTED OUT THAT CLRLY THE CAPT (NOT ANY OTHER CREW MEMBER) HAD TO BE NOTIFIED AND NOTIFIED BEFORE BOARDING. I ALSO ASKED WHY PART 1 SECTION 13; PARAGRAPH 1.20 7 (PRISONERS SHOULD BE BOARDED FIRST AND REMOVED LAST) WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. I WAS TOLD THE GUARDS AND PRISONER HAD ARRIVED LATE. THE DELAY WAS CLAIMED TO BE DUE TO TFC. ACCORDING TO THE AGENT; SHE WAS CALLED FROM THE FRONT TICKET COUNTER AND TOLD TO GET THESE 3 PEOPLE ON THE FLT. BESIDES NOT COMPLYING WITH THE CITED FARS; THE HANDLING OF THIS CAUSED A PAX DISTURBANCE. 1 PAX WAS MOVED TO ACCOMMODATE THE GUARDS AND PRISONER. THIS PAX BEGAN TO COMPLAIN LOUDLY THAT HE WANTED TO SIT WITH HIS WIFE AND 2 CHILDREN (SEATED ACROSS THE AISLE FROM HIM). ALL 4 WERE ACCOMMODATED IN FIRST CLASS FOR THE 32 MIN FLT; SINCE THE LOSS OF HIS SEAT WAS CAUSED BY THE LATE ARR OF THE GUARDS AND PRISONER. WHILE I HAD STRONG RESERVATIONS ABOUT HOW ALL THIS WAS HANDLED; BY THE TIME I BECAME AWARE OF IT; I DECIDED IT WOULD BE BEST HANDLED BY CONTINUING; RATHER THAN REMOVING THE PRISONER. IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY; ALL AGENTS AND POLICE AGENCIES MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE FARS. I WAS UNABLE TO CONFIRM ANY PARTICULARS WITH THE GUARDS CONCERNING THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF RESTRS ON THE PRISONER'S MOVEMENT AND RESTRAINT -- NOR THE GUARDS' RESPONSIBILITIES WITH THEIR FIREARMS. GIVEN THAT THEY DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE BOARDING REQUIREMENTS; I WONDER THAT THEY FULLY UNDERSTOOD THEIR OTHER OBLIGATIONS; AND ALSO; WHETHER I SHOULD HAVE REMOVED THE GUARDS AND PRISONERS FOR NON COMPLIANCE.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.