Documents
FAA Standing Rock No-Fly Zone FOIA Documents
Sep. 29, 2017
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
29410-04484208@requests.muckrock.com
7-AWA-ARC-FOIA (FAA)
Freedom of Information Request: FAA DAPL Protest
Friday, October 28, 2016 10:27:27 PM
October 28, 2016
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
National Freedom of Information Act Staff, ARC-40
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20591
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following
records:
Any and all communications (such as, but not limited to: emails, notes, letters, etc.) between
the FAA (and any person representing the FAA) and any and every law enforcement agency
(federal, local, and state) involving the placement of the flight restriction over what has been
referred to in the news as the DAPL protest. Below is an article that gives further reference to
what records I am seeking.
"The FAA put the TFR in place at the request of state, local and federal officials for law
enforcement activities," FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Cory said
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/mandan/faa-issues-flight-restrictions-over-daplprotest/article_0c270b54-73ff-5ea0-a626-153b33bac828.html
The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not
being made for commercial purposes.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges
in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail
attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to
receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Patrick Mackie
-----Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): 29410-04484208@requests.muckrock.com
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock
DEPT MR 29410
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
29410-04484208@requests.muckrock.com
7-AWA-ARC-FOIA (FAA)
Freedom of Information Request: FAA DAPL Protest
Friday, October 28, 2016 10:27:27 PM
October 28, 2016
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
National Freedom of Information Act Staff, ARC-40
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20591
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following
records:
Any and all communications (such as, but not limited to: emails, notes, letters, etc.) between
the FAA (and any person representing the FAA) and any and every law enforcement agency
(federal, local, and state) involving the placement of the flight restriction over what has been
referred to in the news as the DAPL protest. Below is an article that gives further reference to
what records I am seeking.
"The FAA put the TFR in place at the request of state, local and federal officials for law
enforcement activities," FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Cory said
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/mandan/faa-issues-flight-restrictions-over-daplprotest/article_0c270b54-73ff-5ea0-a626-153b33bac828.html
The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not
being made for commercial purposes.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges
in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail
attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to
receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Patrick Mackie
-----Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): 29410-04484208@requests.muckrock.com
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock
DEPT MR 29410
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent
through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records
requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than
"MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
------
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent
through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records
requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than
"MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
------
FW: New TFR South Central ND
Page 1 of 2
FW: New TFR South Central ND
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:59 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:37 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: FW: New TFR South Central ND
Ref the message below, I know this is a high profile event so I wanted you onboard with my
denial. I plan on denying the request based on there being no hazard from the ground to acft,
exp: no shots fired.
The laser activity is a law enforcement function and acft can report that activity to the ATC
facility.
There is no requirement for acft to be transponder equipped.
The UAS activity is allowed during daylight hours and they are required to avoid manned acft.
Again, any close calls with manned acft is reported to ATC and I believe this is also a LE
function to track down the UAS and operator.
Kevin George
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:02 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: New TFR South Central ND
This email is to request a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) for an area South Central North Dakota.
Background:
Beginning August 10, 2016 a peaceful protest to oil pipeline began near Cannonball, ND. Since then the protest
has become violent with the protestors organizing and deploying in paramilitary style actions. The protest
actions have required law enforcement to require aerial surveillance to provide over watch for security of the
officers on the ground.
The over watch flights have been successful protecting the officers on the ground, but, as time has gone on
without a TFR several planes have entered the surveillance area creating several near miss situations. On one
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
FW: New TFR South Central ND
Page 1 of 2
FW: New TFR South Central ND
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:59 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:37 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: FW: New TFR South Central ND
Ref the message below, I know this is a high profile event so I wanted you onboard with my
denial. I plan on denying the request based on there being no hazard from the ground to acft,
exp: no shots fired.
The laser activity is a law enforcement function and acft can report that activity to the ATC
facility.
There is no requirement for acft to be transponder equipped.
The UAS activity is allowed during daylight hours and they are required to avoid manned acft.
Again, any close calls with manned acft is reported to ATC and I believe this is also a LE
function to track down the UAS and operator.
Kevin George
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:02 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: New TFR South Central ND
This email is to request a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) for an area South Central North Dakota.
Background:
Beginning August 10, 2016 a peaceful protest to oil pipeline began near Cannonball, ND. Since then the protest
has become violent with the protestors organizing and deploying in paramilitary style actions. The protest
actions have required law enforcement to require aerial surveillance to provide over watch for security of the
officers on the ground.
The over watch flights have been successful protecting the officers on the ground, but, as time has gone on
without a TFR several planes have entered the surveillance area creating several near miss situations. On one
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
FW: New TFR South Central ND
Page 2 of 2
occasion an airplane entered the area without a transponder signal creating a very serious situation.
During the law enforcements surveillance, at low level, and observed from law enforcement officers on the
ground observations of firearms to include rifles have been observed by the protestors. The aerial surveillance
units at night have consistently been disrupted by ground to air lasers and today the protestors have been flying
drones to interfer with air operations.
To date nearly 200 individuals have been arrested on criminal charges during since August 10, 2016.
Request:
For the life safety of the officers on the ground and in the air we are requesting a Temporary Fight Restriction
(TFR) for the operational are described below:
x
x
x
Seven (7) statute mile circle from a central point: 46◌֯ 25’3.12N ◌֯100 38’8.64”W (this location is
approximately 2.65 statute miles northwest of Cannonball, North Dakota).
The elevation requested is 5000 msl.
Twentyfour hours per day for the duration of the protest beginning as soon as possible.
Contact information for the TFR flight approval are as follows:
Primary contact: Tactical Operation Center (701) 6673224 or (701) 6673441
Secondary contact: Planning (Eric Pederson) (b) (6)
For TFR FAA questions please contact me at (b) (6)
(of) or (b) (6)
.
If you have any questions please contact me. Your urgent response would be appreciated.
Michael Lynk, Director
North Dakota State Radio
Fraine Barracks Lane, Building 35
Bismarck, North Dakota 58504
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(OF)
(Cell)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
FW: New TFR South Central ND
Page 2 of 2
occasion an airplane entered the area without a transponder signal creating a very serious situation.
During the law enforcements surveillance, at low level, and observed from law enforcement officers on the
ground observations of firearms to include rifles have been observed by the protestors. The aerial surveillance
units at night have consistently been disrupted by ground to air lasers and today the protestors have been flying
drones to interfer with air operations.
To date nearly 200 individuals have been arrested on criminal charges during since August 10, 2016.
Request:
For the life safety of the officers on the ground and in the air we are requesting a Temporary Fight Restriction
(TFR) for the operational are described below:
x
x
x
Seven (7) statute mile circle from a central point: 46◌֯ 25’3.12N ◌֯100 38’8.64”W (this location is
approximately 2.65 statute miles northwest of Cannonball, North Dakota).
The elevation requested is 5000 msl.
Twentyfour hours per day for the duration of the protest beginning as soon as possible.
Contact information for the TFR flight approval are as follows:
Primary contact: Tactical Operation Center (701) 6673224 or (701) 6673441
Secondary contact: Planning (Eric Pederson) (b) (6)
For TFR FAA questions please contact me at (b) (6)
(of) or (b) (6)
.
If you have any questions please contact me. Your urgent response would be appreciated.
Michael Lynk, Director
North Dakota State Radio
Fraine Barracks Lane, Building 35
Bismarck, North Dakota 58504
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(OF)
(Cell)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: North Dakota TFR
Page 1 of 1
RE: North Dakota TFR
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent:
Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:59 PM
To:
Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Attachments: ND 7NMR.jpg (159 KB)
Gary,
Here it is. ZMP answered their phone and acknowledged receipt. I tried to contact Winston Dixon, Chris Rice and
Rebecca Shelby at CSA and not one of them answered their phones.
!FDC 6/6529 ZMP ND..AIRSPACE CANNONBALL,ND..TEMPORARY FLIGHT
RESTRICTIONS ND AN AREA DEFINED AS 7 NM RADIUS OF 462916N1003304W
(BIS164017) SFC-4000FT MSL LAW ENFORCEMENT OPERATION. PURSUANT TO 14
CFR SECTION 91.137(A)(1) TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS ARE IN
EFFECT. ONLY RELIEF AIRCRAFT OPS UNDER DIRECTION OF NORTH DAKOTA
TACTICAL OPERATION CENTER ARE AUTHORIZED IN THE AIRSPACE. NORTH
DAKOTA TACTICAL OPERATION CENTER /TELEPHONE 701-667-3224 IS IN
CHARGE OF ON SCENE EMERGENCY RESPONSE ACTIVITY. MINNEAPOLIS /ZMP/
ARTCC TELEPHONE 651-463-5580 IS THE FAA COORDINATION FACILITY. MEDIA
CONCERNS REGARDING THIS TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO FAA PUBLIC AFFAIRS THROUGH THE WASHINGTON OPERATIONS
CENTER AT 202-267-3333.
1610252000-1611042000
Kerry
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:34 PM
To: Fleming, Kerry (FAA); 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: North Dakota TFR
Kerry
Please coordinate the NOTAM with Central Service Area and ZMP. Once completed please publish for 10 days.
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry:(b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: North Dakota TFR
Page 1 of 1
RE: North Dakota TFR
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent:
Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:59 PM
To:
Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Attachments: ND 7NMR.jpg (159 KB)
Gary,
Here it is. ZMP answered their phone and acknowledged receipt. I tried to contact Winston Dixon, Chris Rice and
Rebecca Shelby at CSA and not one of them answered their phones.
!FDC 6/6529 ZMP ND..AIRSPACE CANNONBALL,ND..TEMPORARY FLIGHT
RESTRICTIONS ND AN AREA DEFINED AS 7 NM RADIUS OF 462916N1003304W
(BIS164017) SFC-4000FT MSL LAW ENFORCEMENT OPERATION. PURSUANT TO 14
CFR SECTION 91.137(A)(1) TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS ARE IN
EFFECT. ONLY RELIEF AIRCRAFT OPS UNDER DIRECTION OF NORTH DAKOTA
TACTICAL OPERATION CENTER ARE AUTHORIZED IN THE AIRSPACE. NORTH
DAKOTA TACTICAL OPERATION CENTER /TELEPHONE 701-667-3224 IS IN
CHARGE OF ON SCENE EMERGENCY RESPONSE ACTIVITY. MINNEAPOLIS /ZMP/
ARTCC TELEPHONE 651-463-5580 IS THE FAA COORDINATION FACILITY. MEDIA
CONCERNS REGARDING THIS TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO FAA PUBLIC AFFAIRS THROUGH THE WASHINGTON OPERATIONS
CENTER AT 202-267-3333.
1610252000-1611042000
Kerry
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:34 PM
To: Fleming, Kerry (FAA); 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: North Dakota TFR
Kerry
Please coordinate the NOTAM with Central Service Area and ZMP. Once completed please publish for 10 days.
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry:(b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 1 of 4
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:33 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Thanks let me know when coordination is complete
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:30 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Gary,
Looking at their message they are only requesting a 4NMR. Graphic attached. I will coordinate
with ATC
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
202-267-8276/ 202-385-4403
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:18 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Copy thanks please make sure Bismarck and ZMP are good with the change.
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry:(b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:18 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 1 of 4
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:33 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Thanks let me know when coordination is complete
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:30 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Gary,
Looking at their message they are only requesting a 4NMR. Graphic attached. I will coordinate
with ATC
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
202-267-8276/ 202-385-4403
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:18 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Copy thanks please make sure Bismarck and ZMP are good with the change.
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry:(b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:18 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 2 of 4
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:09 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Yes please
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:08 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Yes, was comparing LAT/LONG. They are slightly different. Do you want to see it before
publishing.
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:05 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA); Fleming, Kerry (FAA); George, Kevin (FAA)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 2 of 4
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:09 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Yes please
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:08 PM
To: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Subject: RE: South Central ND TFR request
Yes, was comparing LAT/LONG. They are slightly different. Do you want to see it before
publishing.
Kevin
System Operations Support Center
(b) (6)
202-267-8276/
9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov
System Operations Security
FAA Headquarters
800 Independence Ave SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
From: Miller, Gary W (FAA)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:05 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA); Fleming, Kerry (FAA); George, Kevin (FAA)
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 3 of 4
Subject: FW: South Central ND TFR request
Are ya’ll reissuing the TFR with the lower altitude?
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 9:34 AM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Subject: Re: South Central ND TFR request
We received a call from the Bismarck Tower this morning requesting a modification to the TFR listed below. We
want to honor their request as stated:
Modify the TFR to 3500 MSL
From a point N46 26 26 W100 37 52 near the Cannonball ND river bridge located just north of the city of
Cannonball draw a 4 nautical mile circle from that point.
We approve this modification to assist air traffic control in Bismarck.
If you have any questions please give me a call. (b) (6)
.
Mike Lynk
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 25, 2016, at 3:06 PM, "9ATORHQSOSC@faa.gov" <9ATORHQSOSC@faa.gov> wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Mr. Lynk,
I have attached a copy of the Temporary Flight Restriction we just recently issued in
response to your request below. Please confirm receipt of this email. thanks
Regards,
Kerry Fleming
SOSC – FAA HQ
Air Traffic Security
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:02 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: New TFR South Central ND
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 3 of 4
Subject: FW: South Central ND TFR request
Are ya’ll reissuing the TFR with the lower altitude?
Gary W. Miller
Manager, Tactical Operations
System Operations Security
Office: 2022674916
Blackberry: (b) (6)
Gary.w.miller@faa.gov
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 9:34 AM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Subject: Re: South Central ND TFR request
We received a call from the Bismarck Tower this morning requesting a modification to the TFR listed below. We
want to honor their request as stated:
Modify the TFR to 3500 MSL
From a point N46 26 26 W100 37 52 near the Cannonball ND river bridge located just north of the city of
Cannonball draw a 4 nautical mile circle from that point.
We approve this modification to assist air traffic control in Bismarck.
If you have any questions please give me a call. (b) (6)
.
Mike Lynk
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 25, 2016, at 3:06 PM, "9ATORHQSOSC@faa.gov" <9ATORHQSOSC@faa.gov> wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Mr. Lynk,
I have attached a copy of the Temporary Flight Restriction we just recently issued in
response to your request below. Please confirm receipt of this email. thanks
Regards,
Kerry Fleming
SOSC – FAA HQ
Air Traffic Security
From: Lynk, Mike (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 3:02 PM
To: 9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC (FAA)
Subject: New TFR South Central ND
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 4 of 4
This email is to request a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) for an area South Central North
Dakota.
Background:
Beginning August 10, 2016 a peaceful protest to oil pipeline began near Cannonball, ND. Since
then the protest has become violent with the protestors organizing and deploying in paramilitary
style actions. The protest actions have required law enforcement to require aerial surveillance to
provide over watch for security of the officers on the ground.
The over watch flights have been successful protecting the officers on the ground, but, as time has
gone on without a TFR several planes have entered the surveillance area creating several near miss
situations. On one occasion an airplane entered the area without a transponder signal creating a
very serious situation.
During the law enforcements surveillance, at low level, and observed from law enforcement
officers on the ground observations of firearms to include rifles have been observed by the
protestors. The aerial surveillance units at night have consistently been disrupted by ground to air
lasers and today the protestors have been flying drones to interfer with air operations.
To date nearly 200 individuals have been arrested on criminal charges during since August 10,
2016.
Request:
For the life safety of the officers on the ground and in the air we are requesting a Temporary Fight
Restriction (TFR) for the operational are described below:
x
x
x
Seven (7) statute mile circle from a central point: 46◌֯ 25’3.12N ◌֯100 38’8.64”W (this
location is approximately 2.65 statute miles northwest of Cannonball, North Dakota).
The elevation requested is 5000 msl.
Twentyfour hours per day for the duration of the protest beginning as soon as possible.
Contact information for the TFR flight approval are as follows:
Primary contact: Tactical Operation Center (701) 6673224 or (701) 6673441
Secondary contact: Planning (Eric Pederson) (b) (6)
For TFR FAA questions please contact me at (b) (6)
(of) or (b) (6)
.
If you have any questions please contact me. Your urgent response would be appreciated.
Michael Lynk, Director
North Dakota State Radio
Fraine Barracks Lane, Building 35
Bismarck, North Dakota 58504
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(OF)
(Cell)
<161025 Cannonball-ND ZMP 6-6529 - LE Activity.doc>
<ND 7NMR.jpg>
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
RE: South Central ND TFR request
Page 4 of 4
This email is to request a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) for an area South Central North
Dakota.
Background:
Beginning August 10, 2016 a peaceful protest to oil pipeline began near Cannonball, ND. Since
then the protest has become violent with the protestors organizing and deploying in paramilitary
style actions. The protest actions have required law enforcement to require aerial surveillance to
provide over watch for security of the officers on the ground.
The over watch flights have been successful protecting the officers on the ground, but, as time has
gone on without a TFR several planes have entered the surveillance area creating several near miss
situations. On one occasion an airplane entered the area without a transponder signal creating a
very serious situation.
During the law enforcements surveillance, at low level, and observed from law enforcement
officers on the ground observations of firearms to include rifles have been observed by the
protestors. The aerial surveillance units at night have consistently been disrupted by ground to air
lasers and today the protestors have been flying drones to interfer with air operations.
To date nearly 200 individuals have been arrested on criminal charges during since August 10,
2016.
Request:
For the life safety of the officers on the ground and in the air we are requesting a Temporary Fight
Restriction (TFR) for the operational are described below:
x
x
x
Seven (7) statute mile circle from a central point: 46◌֯ 25’3.12N ◌֯100 38’8.64”W (this
location is approximately 2.65 statute miles northwest of Cannonball, North Dakota).
The elevation requested is 5000 msl.
Twentyfour hours per day for the duration of the protest beginning as soon as possible.
Contact information for the TFR flight approval are as follows:
Primary contact: Tactical Operation Center (701) 6673224 or (701) 6673441
Secondary contact: Planning (Eric Pederson) (b) (6)
For TFR FAA questions please contact me at (b) (6)
(of) or (b) (6)
.
If you have any questions please contact me. Your urgent response would be appreciated.
Michael Lynk, Director
North Dakota State Radio
Fraine Barracks Lane, Building 35
Bismarck, North Dakota 58504
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(OF)
(Cell)
<161025 Cannonball-ND ZMP 6-6529 - LE Activity.doc>
<ND 7NMR.jpg>
https://mail-01.ems365.faa.gov/owa/9-ATOR-HQ-SOSC@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note... 11/3/2016
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
ND TFR Discussion
Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:03:46 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Good to talk to you both again today! I’m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I’ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
ND TFR Discussion
Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:03:46 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Good to talk to you both again today! I’m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I’ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: Thro_og, Bn'an (FAA)
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
Date: Thursday, November 03, 2016 6:46:28 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003.Qm
image004.Qm
image007.Qm
image009.Qm
imageOllpm
As an FYI we still plan to submit for a TFR. We got a little sidetracked today with some other
response issues. I have a few eyes on the draft request now though.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
2r
NDDES
Homound
5m. Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:23 AM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: Thro_og, Bn'an (FAA)
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
Date: Thursday, November 03, 2016 6:46:28 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003.Qm
image004.Qm
image007.Qm
image009.Qm
imageOllpm
As an FYI we still plan to submit for a TFR. We got a little sidetracked today with some other
response issues. I have a few eyes on the draft request now though.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
2r
NDDES
Homound
5m. Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:23 AM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Likewise. We miss our colleagues in Bismarck.
Re the justifications, as I noted, the Unified Command (UC) and lead Law Enforcement Agency (LEA)
needs to make a solid case for re-establishing the TFR, which was cancelled this past Tuesday. In
addition to address at least some (or all) of the three triggering threats outlined earlier, please
ensure that they explain what has changed between our Tuesday discussion with the UC, during
which they agreed that there was no furtherjustification for the TFR, and this morning. Citing
threats, which prompted us to originally put in the now cancelled TFR, will not be sufficient unless a
solid assertion is made that those threats have resurfaced and/or new threats have been
encountered. Beyond that, the argument would be buttressed if there is some backup from the
Federal LEAs on the ground-
Candidly, some of the involved tribes are arguing that the action to implement a TFR was
driven not by a genuine safety/security threat, but rather by the desire of the local LEAs handling
the situation to prevent the protestors from using drones to surveil unlawful actions on the part of
LE that infringe on the protestors? First Amendment rights. To be clear, we are steering well
clear of the First Amendment arguments, which are well outside of our AOR. Having said that, you
and our other colleagues in ND need to understand the substantial sensitivities surrounding the
FAA TFR action.
Best,
Rob
Ps hope you and yours, as well as Neal and his family are doing well.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:01 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: ND TFR Discussion
Good to talk to you both again today! I?m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I?ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Likewise. We miss our colleagues in Bismarck.
Re the justifications, as I noted, the Unified Command (UC) and lead Law Enforcement Agency (LEA)
needs to make a solid case for re-establishing the TFR, which was cancelled this past Tuesday. In
addition to address at least some (or all) of the three triggering threats outlined earlier, please
ensure that they explain what has changed between our Tuesday discussion with the UC, during
which they agreed that there was no furtherjustification for the TFR, and this morning. Citing
threats, which prompted us to originally put in the now cancelled TFR, will not be sufficient unless a
solid assertion is made that those threats have resurfaced and/or new threats have been
encountered. Beyond that, the argument would be buttressed if there is some backup from the
Federal LEAs on the ground-
Candidly, some of the involved tribes are arguing that the action to implement a TFR was
driven not by a genuine safety/security threat, but rather by the desire of the local LEAs handling
the situation to prevent the protestors from using drones to surveil unlawful actions on the part of
LE that infringe on the protestors? First Amendment rights. To be clear, we are steering well
clear of the First Amendment arguments, which are well outside of our AOR. Having said that, you
and our other colleagues in ND need to understand the substantial sensitivities surrounding the
FAA TFR action.
Best,
Rob
Ps hope you and yours, as well as Neal and his family are doing well.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:01 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: ND TFR Discussion
Good to talk to you both again today! I?m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I?ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Throop, Brian (FAA); Miller, Gary W (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 11:43:51 AM
image001.png
image003.png
image005.png
image007.png
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
image013.png
image022.png
image024.png
image026.png
image028.png
image029.png
image030.png
10-4.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Throop, Brian (FAA); Miller, Gary W (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 11:43:51 AM
image001.png
image003.png
image005.png
image007.png
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
image013.png
image022.png
image024.png
image026.png
image028.png
image029.png
image030.png
10-4.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Do not thank us yet. We are doing what we can though, and will get back to you asap.
Best,
Rob
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:31 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Cc: Throop, Brian Miller, Gary (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Thank you!
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Do not thank us yet. We are doing what we can though, and will get back to you asap.
Best,
Rob
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:31 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Cc: Throop, Brian Miller, Gary (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Thank you!
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:30 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean.
We are exploring options.
Best,
Rob
Robert H. Sweet
Manager, Strategic Operations Security, AJR-22
Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Organization System Operations Security Directorate
Direct +1 202 267 7102 Mobile + (b) (6)
Email robert.sweet@faa.gov Secure Email robert.sweet@faa.sgov.gov
From: Johnson, Sean M. [(b) (6)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
]
(b) (6), (b) (7)(C)
USMS – Paul Ward: 701-595-2418 and paul.ward@usdoj.gov
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:30 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean.
We are exploring options.
Best,
Rob
Robert H. Sweet
Manager, Strategic Operations Security, AJR-22
Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Organization System Operations Security Directorate
Direct +1 202 267 7102 Mobile + (b) (6)
Email robert.sweet@faa.gov Secure Email robert.sweet@faa.sgov.gov
From: Johnson, Sean M. [(b) (6)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
]
(b) (6), (b) (7)(C)
USMS – Paul Ward: 701-595-2418 and paul.ward@usdoj.gov
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M.(b) (6)
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean,
Were you able to get contact info for the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service pocs?
Cheers,
R.
Ps Gary Miller, whom I have been including on these strings, is our manager of Tactical Ops, which
owns the System Operations Support Center, our ops cell that designs and publishes TFRs.
From: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian (FAA); Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M.(b) (6)
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean,
Were you able to get contact info for the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service pocs?
Cheers,
R.
Ps Gary Miller, whom I have been including on these strings, is our manager of Tactical Ops, which
owns the System Operations Support Center, our ops cell that designs and publishes TFRs.
From: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian (FAA); Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some im Oitant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4. 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson. Sean wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
0 That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
0 Bound by ND 1806 on the west
0 The Cannonball River on the South and East
0 Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to de?ne the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the? and US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set ?re to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The ?re impacted the structural integrity of the
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some im Oitant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4. 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson. Sean wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
0 That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
0 Bound by ND 1806 on the west
0 The Cannonball River on the South and East
0 Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to de?ne the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the? and US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set ?re to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The ?re impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:09:15 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003pm
image004pm
imageOiOpm
imageOilpm
imageOinm
Understood. I appreciate the update
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
9
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:08 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:09:15 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003pm
image004pm
imageOiOpm
imageOilpm
imageOinm
Understood. I appreciate the update
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
9
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:08 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to both- and the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mam-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean _qj} 11d 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
. That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to both- and the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mam-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean _qj} 11d 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
. That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
·
·
·
Bound by ND 1806 on the west
The Cannonball River on the South and East
Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
·
·
·
Bound by ND 1806 on the west
The Cannonball River on the South and East
Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: MillerI Gag ThroogI Brian
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:22:17 PM
Attachments: imageOOSpm
imageOOGpm
image007.2m
image008.gm
imageOlOpm
imageOllpm
imageOlme
Very helpful! Thank you
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
4' at .
NDDES
Maniac-Id Security
State Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
(3'5
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. -@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: MillerI Gag ThroogI Brian
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:22:17 PM
Attachments: imageOOSpm
imageOOGpm
image007.2m
image008.gm
imageOlOpm
imageOllpm
imageOlme
Very helpful! Thank you
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
4' at .
NDDES
Maniac-Id Security
State Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
(3'5
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. -@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects - and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500,
wrote:
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects - and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500,
wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mm-QM]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some i1n ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Depaltment of Emergency Sen/ices
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean -12} m1 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 1) Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mm-QM]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some i1n ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Depaltment of Emergency Sen/ices
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean -12} m1 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 1) Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
o From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
o From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 3:53:00 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
Our pilot called and left Vance a message
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: 'robert.sweet@faa.gov' <robert.sweet@faa.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Pilot of our aircraft involved will contact Vance in a few minutes
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 3:53:00 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
Our pilot called and left Vance a message
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: 'robert.sweet@faa.gov' <robert.sweet@faa.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Pilot of our aircraft involved will contact Vance in a few minutes
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
pps the Fargo FSDO is not getting word of any near-misses. Can you get the word out to
participating operators that they need to alert ATC and FSDO re any near-misses. Vance Emerson,
the deputy manager of that FSDO is standing by.
From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:20 PM
To: 'Johnson, Sean M.'
Cc: 'Miller, Gary W (FAA)'; Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Sean,
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
pps the Fargo FSDO is not getting word of any near-misses. Can you get the word out to
participating operators that they need to alert ATC and FSDO re any near-misses. Vance Emerson,
the deputy manager of that FSDO is standing by.
From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:20 PM
To: 'Johnson, Sean M.'
Cc: 'Miller, Gary W (FAA)'; Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [m-andgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500, rian.throop(wfaa.gov"
wrote:
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [m-andgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500, rian.throop(wfaa.gov"
wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mam-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn citant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson, Sean _1[Lngm;> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mam-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn citant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson, Sean _1[Lngm;> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Fwd: TFR Request
Friday, November 04, 2016 4:41:30 PM
This spells out past and current LE concerns
Sent from my iPhone..
Begin forwarded message:
(b) (6)
From: "Henke, Sgt. Shannon W."
@nd.gov>
Date: November 4, 2016 at 15:38:39 CDT
(b) (6)
To: "Johnson, Sean M."
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a
Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous
requests for a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not
have all the dates in front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my
main concern is having ground officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for
active protests. So, I apologize for not having specific dates and times in this
email as I do not have the time to prepare due to the short notice. I would be
more than willing to provide that information at a later time to "prove" the claims
that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft
has continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being
lucky and an aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight
crew is not lost due to the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the
FAA can assist in minimizing these risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying
weapons. This has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the
ground, both long guns and handguns. This became a reality on October 27th,
when a female protesters fired 3 rounds at close range at law enforcement.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Fwd: TFR Request
Friday, November 04, 2016 4:41:30 PM
This spells out past and current LE concerns
Sent from my iPhone..
Begin forwarded message:
(b) (6)
From: "Henke, Sgt. Shannon W."
@nd.gov>
Date: November 4, 2016 at 15:38:39 CDT
(b) (6)
To: "Johnson, Sean M."
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a
Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous
requests for a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not
have all the dates in front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my
main concern is having ground officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for
active protests. So, I apologize for not having specific dates and times in this
email as I do not have the time to prepare due to the short notice. I would be
more than willing to provide that information at a later time to "prove" the claims
that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft
has continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being
lucky and an aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight
crew is not lost due to the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the
FAA can assist in minimizing these risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying
weapons. This has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the
ground, both long guns and handguns. This became a reality on October 27th,
when a female protesters fired 3 rounds at close range at law enforcement.
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a
drone over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement.
This same operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet
AGL in an attempt to strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206
aircraft. Again, law enforcement got lucky and no one was injured. I personally
completed a report and filed felony charges in Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was
cleared to be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the
pilot and crew, some of which were law enforcement and they feared for their
life. Drones today have the technology for very stable flight and can withstand
rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft.
The pilot informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has
occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and
flown at a law enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of
activity occurs every chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to
persons on the ground and other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a
manner that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until
there is an actual incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is
injured, a TFR will not be in place. I was also informed the FAA stated since
there were no additional incidents, the TFR was taken down. The exact purpose
of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent operators from endangering
other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or even the absence of
further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering
armed individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not
only law enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to
ensure the movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not
being broadcast live by the use of drones. With today's technology this would be
very easy to do with a drone and the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a
drone over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement.
This same operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet
AGL in an attempt to strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206
aircraft. Again, law enforcement got lucky and no one was injured. I personally
completed a report and filed felony charges in Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was
cleared to be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the
pilot and crew, some of which were law enforcement and they feared for their
life. Drones today have the technology for very stable flight and can withstand
rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft.
The pilot informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has
occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and
flown at a law enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of
activity occurs every chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to
persons on the ground and other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a
manner that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until
there is an actual incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is
injured, a TFR will not be in place. I was also informed the FAA stated since
there were no additional incidents, the TFR was taken down. The exact purpose
of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent operators from endangering
other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or even the absence of
further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering
armed individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not
only law enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to
ensure the movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not
being broadcast live by the use of drones. With today's technology this would be
very easy to do with a drone and the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and
on-going. I will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the
necessity of the TFR and answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed
by the unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue
will be raised why the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the
requesting agency. With the above incidents documented and the on-going close
calls and FAA regulations violations, it will be difficult to defend the decision to
not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will
be more than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims
and as to the reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft
and law enforcement. Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as
well as law enforcement officers trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
on-going. I will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the
necessity of the TFR and answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed
by the unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue
will be raised why the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the
requesting agency. With the above incidents documented and the on-going close
calls and FAA regulations violations, it will be difficult to defend the decision to
not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will
be more than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims
and as to the reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft
and law enforcement. Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as
well as law enforcement officers trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
Friday, November 04, 2016 7:31:55 PM
Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>
> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
>
> Sean,
>
> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>
> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
in the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>
> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>
> best,
>
> Rob
>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
Friday, November 04, 2016 7:31:55 PM
Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>
> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
>
> Sean,
>
> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>
> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
in the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>
> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>
> best,
>
> Rob
>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58:00 PM
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58:00 PM
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
in the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
in the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Monday, November 07, 2016 12:10:15 PM
Thx!
FSDO reached out to us asking for reports of possible violations. We will be forwarding them on as they occur
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:07 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
n@nd.gov>
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Sean,
At the current ops tempo, flight following is working. Bismarck approach says they are easily keeping track of the
participating aircraft.
Hope you are doing well,
R.
-----Original Message----@nd.gov]
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58 PM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Monday, November 07, 2016 12:10:15 PM
Thx!
FSDO reached out to us asking for reports of possible violations. We will be forwarding them on as they occur
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:07 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
n@nd.gov>
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Sean,
At the current ops tempo, flight following is working. Bismarck approach says they are easily keeping track of the
participating aircraft.
Hope you are doing well,
R.
-----Original Message----@nd.gov]
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto (b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58 PM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Reporting Potential TFR Violations
Tuesday, November 08, 2016 5:38:29 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Vance
Would it work if we gave you a summary every few days of potential violations of the TFR, unless
such violations result in a safety incident for an aircraft or we actually catch a violator?
We are having occurrences but the only facts we are able to provide is time. Since they are UAS, it
is difficult to even give a decent description past for e.g. quadcopter. Operator description is even
more challenging. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Reporting Potential TFR Violations
Tuesday, November 08, 2016 5:38:29 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Vance
Would it work if we gave you a summary every few days of potential violations of the TFR, unless
such violations result in a safety incident for an aircraft or we actually catch a violator?
We are having occurrences but the only facts we are able to provide is time. Since they are UAS, it
is difficult to even give a decent description past for e.g. quadcopter. Operator description is even
more challenging. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: TthQ, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 8:11:08 AM
Attachments: imageOOme
image003pm
MM
I had asked our guys to pull that together. Without having the eaches in front of me, I can tell you
they have remained active in the incident area. Setting that aside a moment, it has been very
helpful in keeping manned aircraft (participating and non-participating) safe as I mentioned
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
gt
?army
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:05 AM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Morning Sean. Do you have specific information about UASs violating the TFR or creating a
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: TthQ, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 8:11:08 AM
Attachments: imageOOme
image003pm
MM
I had asked our guys to pull that together. Without having the eaches in front of me, I can tell you
they have remained active in the incident area. Setting that aside a moment, it has been very
helpful in keeping manned aircraft (participating and non-participating) safe as I mentioned
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
gt
?army
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:05 AM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Morning Sean. Do you have specific information about UASs violating the TFR or creating a
safety/security hazard? We are discussing an extension this morning and the more justification you
can provide the stronger our position will be. Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:16 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: TFR Extension
Rob/Brian-
We still see a need for a continuation of the TFR. UAS activity is still occurring, but non-
palticipating aircraft are out of the way of paiticipating ones (a good trend thanks to the TFR).
What do we need to do on our end to extend the TFR another 7-14 days?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
safety/security hazard? We are discussing an extension this morning and the more justification you
can provide the stronger our position will be. Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:16 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: TFR Extension
Rob/Brian-
We still see a need for a continuation of the TFR. UAS activity is still occurring, but non-
palticipating aircraft are out of the way of paiticipating ones (a good trend thanks to the TFR).
What do we need to do on our end to extend the TFR another 7-14 days?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: Swee Robert FAA ano_og, Brian
Cc: Emersonl Vance
Subject: TFR Extension Request - State of ND
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 4:24:25 PM
Attachments: ier004.m
ier006.m
ier008.m
Rob/ Bria n-
On behalf of the State of ND, I wish to ask for an extension in time for the current TFR outlined in
FDC NOTAM 6/3362. We would request the TFR be extended 14 days from the current expiration
date in the NOTAM, or to 11/29/2016 at 2300hrs UTC. We desire no other changes be made to the
current TFR.
Shannon Henke of our ND Highway Patrol has outlined some specifics on why a TFR is still
warranted below. amplify and summarize the issues below:
0 Violations of the TFR by UAS described below were in airspace well outside the block
established over the encampment for those staying there to operate their UAS systems. We
wanted to make that clear.
0 The TFR has worked as intended to ensure the safety of all manned aircraft operators by
keeping non-participating aircraft clear of participating law enforcement aircraft, and more
important, reduce or eliminate the chances of a non-participating civilian pilot being lazed
or spotlighted. The area of the TFR is also of a size where no significant impacts have been
experienced by civilian aircraft or airports. feel this reason in and of itself provides a very
solid foundation for extension it has been proven to work
0 The TFR also has balanced 1St Amendment rights with aviation and responder safety,
especially with regard to UAS operations. It?s extension is necessary for the continued
safety and protection of lawful protestors, law enforcement, and the public. It also provides
the additional tools we all need for enforcement actions
We deeply appreciate the support you have given the state to help create a safer environment for
all in the area of the TFR, both on the ground and in the air. We respectfully ask for your continued
support in this regard. Should you need any further information or have questions, please feel free
to reach out to me at any time.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: Swee Robert FAA ano_og, Brian
Cc: Emersonl Vance
Subject: TFR Extension Request - State of ND
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 4:24:25 PM
Attachments: ier004.m
ier006.m
ier008.m
Rob/ Bria n-
On behalf of the State of ND, I wish to ask for an extension in time for the current TFR outlined in
FDC NOTAM 6/3362. We would request the TFR be extended 14 days from the current expiration
date in the NOTAM, or to 11/29/2016 at 2300hrs UTC. We desire no other changes be made to the
current TFR.
Shannon Henke of our ND Highway Patrol has outlined some specifics on why a TFR is still
warranted below. amplify and summarize the issues below:
0 Violations of the TFR by UAS described below were in airspace well outside the block
established over the encampment for those staying there to operate their UAS systems. We
wanted to make that clear.
0 The TFR has worked as intended to ensure the safety of all manned aircraft operators by
keeping non-participating aircraft clear of participating law enforcement aircraft, and more
important, reduce or eliminate the chances of a non-participating civilian pilot being lazed
or spotlighted. The area of the TFR is also of a size where no significant impacts have been
experienced by civilian aircraft or airports. feel this reason in and of itself provides a very
solid foundation for extension it has been proven to work
0 The TFR also has balanced 1St Amendment rights with aviation and responder safety,
especially with regard to UAS operations. It?s extension is necessary for the continued
safety and protection of lawful protestors, law enforcement, and the public. It also provides
the additional tools we all need for enforcement actions
We deeply appreciate the support you have given the state to help create a safer environment for
all in the area of the TFR, both on the ground and in the air. We respectfully ask for your continued
support in this regard. Should you need any further information or have questions, please feel free
to reach out to me at any time.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
(b) (6)
Cc: Lynk, Mike
@nd.gov>
Subject: Fw: TFR Request
Sean,
We need to submit a request to continue the TFR south of Mandan in Morton County, ND.
The current TFR is set to expire on November 15th.
The situation in the TFR area has continued to be extremely active and I do not foresee the
activity to decrease in the near future. It appears the TFR has been effective in decreasing
manned aircraft incidents, however the UAS flights violating the TFR continue multiple times
daily. The reduction of manned aircraft incidents is not a valid reason to let the TFR expire,
it proves the system in place does have a positive effect on safety. I am in close contact with
the Forward Command staff multiple times daily and they continue to report demonstrator
UAS aircraft are consistently flying directly over them, oftentimes even passing them on
reconnaissance flights.
The threat to aircraft and persons on the ground, including lawful demonstrators, protestors
and law enforcement continues. The use of manned aircraft for law enforcement missions is
critical to the safety of all involved. Intel continues to flow in that firearms and violence is a
real threat to law enforcement.
If requested, I can work on providing dates (daily) and times when the unlawful UAS flights
occur. The law enforcement pilots continue to report they are shinned by extremely bright
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
(b) (6)
Cc: Lynk, Mike
@nd.gov>
Subject: Fw: TFR Request
Sean,
We need to submit a request to continue the TFR south of Mandan in Morton County, ND.
The current TFR is set to expire on November 15th.
The situation in the TFR area has continued to be extremely active and I do not foresee the
activity to decrease in the near future. It appears the TFR has been effective in decreasing
manned aircraft incidents, however the UAS flights violating the TFR continue multiple times
daily. The reduction of manned aircraft incidents is not a valid reason to let the TFR expire,
it proves the system in place does have a positive effect on safety. I am in close contact with
the Forward Command staff multiple times daily and they continue to report demonstrator
UAS aircraft are consistently flying directly over them, oftentimes even passing them on
reconnaissance flights.
The threat to aircraft and persons on the ground, including lawful demonstrators, protestors
and law enforcement continues. The use of manned aircraft for law enforcement missions is
critical to the safety of all involved. Intel continues to flow in that firearms and violence is a
real threat to law enforcement.
If requested, I can work on providing dates (daily) and times when the unlawful UAS flights
occur. The law enforcement pilots continue to report they are shinned by extremely bright
spot lights on a nightly basis. Another incident of demonstrators attempting to laser the pilot
also occurred in the last 10 days.
I have been informed by the Morton County State's Attorney's Office the FBI would be in
contact with me in the near future to continue their investigation on these cases. I am
waiting to hear from them.
Again, I am requesting the TFR stay active for an additional 14 days. I also request the FAA
immediately assist law enforcement in finding a solution to stop the illegal flights of UAS
aircraft in the TFR area. Law Enforcement Command has been extremely patient in dealing
with the continued harassment with these illegal flights/operators.
If you need anything additional, please contact me anytime.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Dr
Bismarck, ND 58501
(b) (6)
From: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 3:38 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a Temporary
Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous requests for
a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not have all the dates in
front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my main concern is having ground
officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for active protests. So, I apologize for
not having specific dates and times in this email as I do not have the time to prepare due to
the short notice. I would be more than willing to provide that information at a later time to
"prove" the claims that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft has
continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being lucky and an
aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight crew is not lost due to
the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the FAA can assist in minimizing these
spot lights on a nightly basis. Another incident of demonstrators attempting to laser the pilot
also occurred in the last 10 days.
I have been informed by the Morton County State's Attorney's Office the FBI would be in
contact with me in the near future to continue their investigation on these cases. I am
waiting to hear from them.
Again, I am requesting the TFR stay active for an additional 14 days. I also request the FAA
immediately assist law enforcement in finding a solution to stop the illegal flights of UAS
aircraft in the TFR area. Law Enforcement Command has been extremely patient in dealing
with the continued harassment with these illegal flights/operators.
If you need anything additional, please contact me anytime.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Dr
Bismarck, ND 58501
(b) (6)
From: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W.
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 3:38 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a Temporary
Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous requests for
a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not have all the dates in
front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my main concern is having ground
officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for active protests. So, I apologize for
not having specific dates and times in this email as I do not have the time to prepare due to
the short notice. I would be more than willing to provide that information at a later time to
"prove" the claims that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft has
continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being lucky and an
aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight crew is not lost due to
the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the FAA can assist in minimizing these
risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying weapons. This
has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the ground, both long guns and
handguns. This became a reality on October 27th, when a female protesters fired 3 rounds
at close range at law enforcement.
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a drone
over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement. This same
operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet AGL in an attempt to
strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206 aircraft. Again, law enforcement got
lucky and no one was injured. I personally completed a report and filed felony charges in
Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was cleared to
be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the pilot and crew, some
of which were law enforcement and they feared for their life. Drones today have the
technology for very stable flight and can withstand rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft. The pilot
informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and flown at a law
enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of activity occurs every
chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to persons on the ground and
other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a manner
that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until there is an actual
incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is injured, a TFR will not be in
place. I was also informed the FAA stated since there were no additional incidents, the TFR
was taken down. The exact purpose of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent
operators from endangering other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or
even the absence of further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in
place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering armed
individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not only law
enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to ensure the
movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not being broadcast live by
the use of drones. With today's technology this would be very easy to do with a drone and
risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying weapons. This
has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the ground, both long guns and
handguns. This became a reality on October 27th, when a female protesters fired 3 rounds
at close range at law enforcement.
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a drone
over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement. This same
operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet AGL in an attempt to
strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206 aircraft. Again, law enforcement got
lucky and no one was injured. I personally completed a report and filed felony charges in
Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was cleared to
be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the pilot and crew, some
of which were law enforcement and they feared for their life. Drones today have the
technology for very stable flight and can withstand rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft. The pilot
informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and flown at a law
enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of activity occurs every
chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to persons on the ground and
other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a manner
that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until there is an actual
incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is injured, a TFR will not be in
place. I was also informed the FAA stated since there were no additional incidents, the TFR
was taken down. The exact purpose of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent
operators from endangering other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or
even the absence of further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in
place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering armed
individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not only law
enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to ensure the
movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not being broadcast live by
the use of drones. With today's technology this would be very easy to do with a drone and
the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and on-going. I
will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the necessity of the TFR and
answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed by the
unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue will be raised why
the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the requesting agency. With the
above incidents documented and the on-going close calls and FAA regulations violations, it
will be difficult to defend the decision to not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will be more
than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims and as to the
reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft and law enforcement.
Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as well as law enforcement officers
trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and on-going. I
will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the necessity of the TFR and
answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed by the
unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue will be raised why
the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the requesting agency. With the
above incidents documented and the on-going close calls and FAA regulations violations, it
will be difficult to defend the decision to not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will be more
than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims and as to the
reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft and law enforcement.
Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as well as law enforcement officers
trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
From: Johnson, Sean M.
T0: Tth9, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
Date: Monday, November 21, 2016 3:01:19 PM
Attachments: image010.gm
image011.gm
image012.gm
image014.gm
image015.gm
image016.gm
image004.gm
image006.gm
image008.gm
Brian what number can I call you at? I thought I had it. Or you can call me at the?
number.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
4, 2r ..
NDDES
Hon-Mano Security
Sm. Roma
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 1:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
This email is from an external source.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
T0: Tth9, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
Date: Monday, November 21, 2016 3:01:19 PM
Attachments: image010.gm
image011.gm
image012.gm
image014.gm
image015.gm
image016.gm
image004.gm
image006.gm
image008.gm
Brian what number can I call you at? I thought I had it. Or you can call me at the?
number.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
4, 2r ..
NDDES
Hon-Mano Security
Sm. Roma
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 1:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
I will ping the group and get back to you. Do you have any new specific threat info we can use to
push this? Anything from the last few days? Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 1:41 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: FW: TFR \?olations with UAS Last Night
meant to cc you all as well on this.
The TFR expires on Nov 25, which is the Friday after Thanksgiving. Should we start working an
extension now for another 2 weeks? The need remains.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
cem?
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 11:01 AM
To: 'vance.emerson@faa.gov' <vance.emerson@faa.gov>
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
I will ping the group and get back to you. Do you have any new specific threat info we can use to
push this? Anything from the last few days? Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 1:41 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: FW: TFR \?olations with UAS Last Night
meant to cc you all as well on this.
The TFR expires on Nov 25, which is the Friday after Thanksgiving. Should we start working an
extension now for another 2 weeks? The need remains.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
cem?
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 11:01 AM
To: 'vance.emerson@faa.gov' <vance.emerson@faa.gov>
Cc: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
Vance
We had 4-5 small UAS flying in the TFR last night and harassing our law enforcement officers. I
personally observed a gentleman identified as (b) (6)
operating a small UAS on a live feed
from Unicorn Riot. He openly admitted it was his UAS system and he was flying it. The area he was
operating it from was west of the Backwater Bridge on 1806, thus outside the exclusion area of the
TFR. I observed his UAS flying over law enforcement officers near the bridge on this live feed as
well.
His Facebook page is (b) (6)
should also have it
on their site. (b) (6)
(b) (6)
Sgt Henke can remain the POC. I am passing on because he is busy with tactical activities and I was
the witness to the potential TFR and Small UAS Rule violations
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
Cc: Henke, Sgt. Shannon W. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Violations with UAS Last Night
Vance
We had 4-5 small UAS flying in the TFR last night and harassing our law enforcement officers. I
personally observed a gentleman identified as (b) (6)
operating a small UAS on a live feed
from Unicorn Riot. He openly admitted it was his UAS system and he was flying it. The area he was
operating it from was west of the Backwater Bridge on 1806, thus outside the exclusion area of the
TFR. I observed his UAS flying over law enforcement officers near the bridge on this live feed as
well.
His Facebook page is (b) (6)
should also have it
on their site. (b) (6)
(b) (6)
Sgt Henke can remain the POC. I am passing on because he is busy with tactical activities and I was
the witness to the potential TFR and Small UAS Rule violations
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Throop, Brian (FAA); Miller, Gary W (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 11:43:51 AM
image001.png
image003.png
image005.png
image007.png
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
image013.png
image022.png
image024.png
image026.png
image028.png
image029.png
image030.png
10-4.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Throop, Brian (FAA); Miller, Gary W (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 11:43:51 AM
image001.png
image003.png
image005.png
image007.png
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
image013.png
image022.png
image024.png
image026.png
image028.png
image029.png
image030.png
10-4.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Do not thank us yet. We are doing what we can though, and will get back to you asap.
Best,
Rob
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:31 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Cc: Throop, Bn?an Miller, Gary (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Thank you!
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Do not thank us yet. We are doing what we can though, and will get back to you asap.
Best,
Rob
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:31 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Cc: Throop, Bn?an Miller, Gary (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Thank you!
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:30 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean.
We are exploring options.
Best,
Rob
Robert H. Sweet
Manager, Strategic Operations Security, AJR-22
Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Organization System Operations Security Directorate
Direct +1 202 267 7102 Mobile (b) (6)
Email robert.sweet@faa.gov Secure Email robert.sweet@faa.sgov.gov
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto:(b) (6)
@nd.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
(b) (6), (b) (7)(C)
USMS – Paul Ward: 701-595-2418 and paul.ward@usdoj.gov
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:30 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov; Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean.
We are exploring options.
Best,
Rob
Robert H. Sweet
Manager, Strategic Operations Security, AJR-22
Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Organization System Operations Security Directorate
Direct +1 202 267 7102 Mobile (b) (6)
Email robert.sweet@faa.gov Secure Email robert.sweet@faa.sgov.gov
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto:(b) (6)
@nd.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
(b) (6), (b) (7)(C)
USMS – Paul Ward: 701-595-2418 and paul.ward@usdoj.gov
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean,
Were you able to get contact info for the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service pocs?
Cheers,
R.
Ps Gary Miller, whom I have been including on these strings, is our manager of Tactical Ops, which
owns the System Operations Support Center, our ops cell that designs and publishes TFRs.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto(b) (6)
@nd.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian (FAA); Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Thanks, Sean,
Were you able to get contact info for the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service pocs?
Cheers,
R.
Ps Gary Miller, whom I have been including on these strings, is our manager of Tactical Ops, which
owns the System Operations Support Center, our ops cell that designs and publishes TFRs.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto(b) (6)
@nd.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian (FAA); Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some im Oitant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4. 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson. Sean -0 ndgov> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
0 That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
0 Bound by ND 1806 on the west
0 The Cannonball River on the South and East
0 Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to de?ne the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the? US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set ?re to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The ?re impacted the structural integrity of the
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some im Oitant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Jolmson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4. 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Jolmson. Sean -0 ndgov> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
0 That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
0 Bound by ND 1806 on the west
0 The Cannonball River on the South and East
0 Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to de?ne the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the? US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set ?re to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The ?re impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
T0: Tth9, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:09:15 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003pm
image004pm
imageOlOpm
imageOllpm
imageOlme
Understood. I appreciate the update
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
.. at .
NDDES
Homound Socunry
Sm. Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:08 PM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
T0: Tth9, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:09:15 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOme
image003pm
image004pm
imageOlOpm
imageOllpm
imageOlme
Understood. I appreciate the update
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
.. at .
NDDES
Homound Socunry
Sm. Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:08 PM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to both the FBI and the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [maiLE-Qndgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean -12; nd 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
. That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to both the FBI and the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [maiLE-Qndgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some irn ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean -12; nd 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
. That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
·
·
·
Bound by ND 1806 on the west
The Cannonball River on the South and East
Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
·
·
·
Bound by ND 1806 on the west
The Cannonball River on the South and East
Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted (b) (7)(E)
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: MillerI Gag ThroogI Bn'an
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:22:17 PM
Attachments: image005.gm
image006.gm
image007.gm
image008.gm
image010.gm
image011.gm
image012.gm
Very helpful! Thank you
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
. at
NDDES
Hom?and Security
State Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: MillerI Gag ThroogI Bn'an
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:22:17 PM
Attachments: image005.gm
image006.gm
image007.gm
image008.gm
image010.gm
image011.gm
image012.gm
Very helpful! Thank you
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
. at
NDDES
Hom?and Security
State Radio
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects - and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500,
wrote:
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects - and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500,
wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out t_ to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mm-QM]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some i1n ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Depaltment of Emergency Sen/ices
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean m1 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 1) Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out t_ to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mm-QM]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some i1n ortant information we 'ust received for some reater context.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Depaltment of Emergency Sen/ices
Division of Homeland Secm?ity
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell
011 Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean m1 00y> wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 1) Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
0 Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
o From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
o From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
.
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
.
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 3:53:00 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
Our pilot called and left Vance a message
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell:(b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: 'robert.sweet@faa.gov' <robert.sweet@faa.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Pilot of our aircraft involved will contact Vance in a few minutes
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Friday, November 04, 2016 3:53:00 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
Our pilot called and left Vance a message
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell:(b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: 'robert.sweet@faa.gov' <robert.sweet@faa.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Pilot of our aircraft involved will contact Vance in a few minutes
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
pps the Fargo FSDO is not getting word of any near-misses. Can you get the word out to
participating operators that they need to alert ATC and FSDO re any near-misses. Vance Emerson,
the deputy manager of that FSDO is standing by.
From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:20 PM
To: 'Johnson, Sean M.'
Cc: 'Miller, Gary W (FAA)'; Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Sean,
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto:robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:24 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
pps the Fargo FSDO is not getting word of any near-misses. Can you get the word out to
participating operators that they need to alert ATC and FSDO re any near-misses. Vance Emerson,
the deputy manager of that FSDO is standing by.
From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:20 PM
To: 'Johnson, Sean M.'
Cc: 'Miller, Gary W (FAA)'; Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: TFR Request - State of ND
Sean,
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [m-andgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500, rian.throop(wfaa.gov"
wrote:
Thanks. We are standing by. Assertions by the UC and participating LEAs that there is a credible,
ongoing threat that has an aviation-nexus would make for a stronger argument. Per our various
discussions with you and some of the LE players, threats, which would better speak to the
requirements of 14 CFR 91.137, could include unlawful usage of drones in a manner that: 1) poses a
danger to aircraft, specifically including LE participating flights; 2) poses a danger to persons on the
ground; and/or 3) poses a serious threat to active (not potential) LE operations.
The basic threshold that needs to be overcome is that an active hazard exists in the area.
Hope that helps.
Ps the typical scenario for our use of an LE 91.137a1 TFR would be people firing at LE aircraft in the
area Ferguson) or, hypothetically, a SWAT team moving in on a house in which there are
armed and dangerous suspects and we want to ensure that live video of that SWAT movement is
not being broadcast on TV.
the reason why simply citing an incident or two in the past poses problems is that we, in fact
established a TFR previously and only took it down after the UC confirmed the lack of additional
incidents or an ongoing threat. WE need to justify re-establishing a TFR based on new info re an
ongoing threat.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [m-andgov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Getting information in writing soon on threats from the ground. We also received word that
one of our LE aircraft just had a near miss this AM with a non-participating aircraft in the area
in question.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:08 PM -0500, rian.throop(wfaa.gov"
wrote:
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mama-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some important information we just received for some greater context. We
estimate the camp population is between 2000 and 3000 people as of yesterday. Embedded in
these numbers are of rmlawful actors I referenced below. What was very concerning
is an estimated growth from Nov 2 to Nov 3 of between 750 - 875 people. We have never seen
a growth that large in 24 horu?s. There is also good intel they are going to be even more
desperate in their actions.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Hey Sean..just wanted to update you on what?s going on. There is very robust discussion here
about whether or not to issue the TFR. Management at the highest levels of the FAA is aware of
this and is involved in the discussion. We have reached out to? the USMS to
request input, and we are currently awaiting their written response. We?ll keep you updated.
Thanks
Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mama-W]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Throop, Brian Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: Re: TFR Request - State of ND
Rob/Brian-
I need to add some important information we just received for some greater context. We
estimate the camp population is between 2000 and 3000 people as of yesterday. Embedded in
these numbers are of rmlawful actors I referenced below. What was very concerning
is an estimated growth from Nov 2 to Nov 3 of between 750 - 875 people. We have never seen
a growth that large in 24 horu?s. There is also good intel they are going to be even more
desperate in their actions.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 AM -0500, "Johnson, Sean wrote:
On behalf of the State of North Dakota, I am writing to request a 14 CFR Section 91 Temporary
Flight Restriction per the parameters below:
. Only response aircraft in support of law enforcement acting under the direction of the ND Tactical
Operations Center (701-667-3224) and aircraft approved by ATC in coordination with the
domestic events network may operate within the TFR
. The extent of the TFR will be nearly identical to the one we were granted before, as described in
FDC NOTAM 6/7258
0 4 NM radius of 462626N1003752W (BIS164019.3) (Except as detailed below)
0 From the surface to 3500 ft MSL (Except as detailed below)
0 From the present until 0600hrs UTC November 14th, 2016
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
We are requesting an area of exclusion from the TFR immediately over an encampment in the area. The
area in question we ask to be excluded is:
· That airspace from the surface to 2000 ft MSL and,
· Bound by ND 1806 on the west
· The Cannonball River on the South and East
· Cantapeta Creek on the North
If the FAA desires to define the area of exclusion by a radius and center point versus geographical
features (which would be of most use to UAS operators on the ground inside the camp), we would desire
the same vertical parameters described above, coupled with a 0.3NM radius from 464210N1006310W.
This TFR has the support of the (b) (7)(E)
US Marshals Service.
There are multiple reasons the state is requesting this TFR, each related directly or indirectly to civil
disorder and riots occurring within the area in question since August 10th, 2016. I will describe them
below:
1. On October 27th, 2016, unlawful actors set fire to several vehicles on a bridge on ND 1806 which
crosses over Cantapeta Creek near the Cannonball River. The fire impacted the structural integrity of the
bridge, and it is now unusable by the public and responders. Since the original TFR was lifted, we have
learned that it likely will not be repaired until the Spring of 2017. There is a large encampment of
protestors just to the south and east of this bridge (referenced above) who have been cut off from timely
ground ambulance and firefighting services.
Firefighting services to this area are now primarily provided by the ND National Guard via helicopter water
buckets; a capability we employed on October 30th, 2016 to protect the camp from a wildfire nearby it.
Due to the dryness of this area and the immediacy of a fire response, sufficient time will not exist to
emplace and communicate a TFR on an as needed basis. It must be in place already in order to keep the
airspace clear for the aerial firefighting operations necessary to protect those at the camp. Again,
helicopter is currently the only timely firefighting resource due to this bridge being unusable, and clear
airspace is also vital for air ambulance services (which also provide the timeliest lifesaving medical
support to this remote area, now that the bridge is unusable).
2. Since October 14th, 2016 there have been two near misses with non-participating civilian aircraft
flying through the response area, and at least one other aircraft flying through airspace where law
enforcement aircraft are conducting official flights. The dates of these incidents are:
· Friday October 14th
· Monday October 17th
· Thursday October 20th
All three of these incidents occurred directly over the aforementioned camp, or within the 4 nautical mile
requested TFR location. Now that the previous TFR has been lifted, there has been an increase in air
traffic near the area where response aircraft continue to work, causing law enforcement aircraft to have to
adjust their operations when present.
3. Since the incident began on August 10th, 2016, there are several documented incidents in the
past and currently proposed TFR area where people on the ground have used high powered laser
pointers and spotlights to blind pilots flying overhead. This has happened to both law enforcement
aircraft, and non-participating civil aircraft when a TFR wasn’t in effect. This has been and remains an
ongoing concern throughout the incident. Law enforcement aircraft in use resemble civilian aircraft, and
there is great concern that as civilian traffic continues to fly in the area, civilian pilots will be blinded by a
laser strike or spotlight to a point where a devastating accident may occur.
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
.
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
In addition, private drones have been constantly flying almost daily (except when a TFR was in effect) in a
dangerous manner immediately over law enforcement officers while they were performing their official
duties. This activity has intensified with the removal of the original TFR, especially now that unlawful
actors have been removed from private property and reside primarily in the aforementioned camp. The
operators of the UAS have renewed their efforts to violate rules and regulations that the FAA has in place
to protect people on the ground from harm now that a TFR is gone. UAS have often operated at face
level, and have recently attempted to enter law enforcement vehicles after the TFR was lifted. They have
also been deliberately flown at response aircraft in the past, causing them to take evasive actions and
placing the occupants of these aircraft in fear of their lives. Once the TFR was lifted, they also interfered
with law enforcement watercraft who were in the process of executing a water rescue.
Due to the violence that has in fact been displayed over and over again throughout this period of civil
disorder and riots, it is only a matter of time until a law enforcement officer, a lawful protester, or member
of the public is injured (or worse yet killed) as a result of unlawful actor usage of UAS. When the TFR was
lifted, (b) (7)(E)
.
In closing, the State of North Dakota feels this TFR request is both reasonable and prudent. Regulating
flights through a TFR has helped reduce this risk in the past, and will again once re-implemented. We feel
the federal government has a duty and responsibility to act in this regard by re-implementing the
requested TFR with the exclusion area described above. The previous TFR resulted in a marked
decrease in much of the unsafe and unlawful activity described above, and it is our desire to ensure that
the safety of our responders, lawful protestors, the public, and both participating and non-participating
aircraft is ensured. A TFR has proven its effectiveness before, and now that unsafe conditions have
increased again, we are asking for another to help reinstate a safe environment in the area.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Fwd: TFR Request
Friday, November 04, 2016 4:41:30 PM
This spells out past and current LE concerns
Sent from my iPhone..
Begin forwarded message:
(b) (6)
From: "Henke, Sgt. Shannon W."
@nd.gov>
Date: November 4, 2016 at 15:38:39 CDT
(b) (6)
To: "Johnson, Sean M."
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a
Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous
requests for a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not
have all the dates in front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my
main concern is having ground officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for
active protests. So, I apologize for not having specific dates and times in this
email as I do not have the time to prepare due to the short notice. I would be
more than willing to provide that information at a later time to "prove" the claims
that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft
has continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being
lucky and an aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight
crew is not lost due to the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the
FAA can assist in minimizing these risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying
weapons. This has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the
ground, both long guns and handguns. This became a reality on October 27th,
when a female protesters fired 3 rounds at close range at law enforcement.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Fwd: TFR Request
Friday, November 04, 2016 4:41:30 PM
This spells out past and current LE concerns
Sent from my iPhone..
Begin forwarded message:
(b) (6)
From: "Henke, Sgt. Shannon W."
@nd.gov>
Date: November 4, 2016 at 15:38:39 CDT
(b) (6)
To: "Johnson, Sean M."
@nd.gov>
Subject: TFR Request
Sean,
This email is to address the multiple requests that have been submitted for a
Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) south of Mandan, ND in Morton County.
A portion of these examples have been addressed at least twice in our previous
requests for a TFR. New incidents as current as today are also included. I do not
have all the dates in front of me. Today is extremely busy with field ops and my
main concern is having ground officers, pilots and aircraft prepped and ready for
active protests. So, I apologize for not having specific dates and times in this
email as I do not have the time to prepare due to the short notice. I would be
more than willing to provide that information at a later time to "prove" the claims
that these incidents are in fact occurring.
Since the beginning of this event, the active threat to law enforcement and aircraft
has continued and even escalated. It is a matter of time until we are done being
lucky and an aircraft receives damage. We can only pray for the best that a flight
crew is not lost due to the violations that keep occurring. Especially since the
FAA can assist in minimizing these risks.
Law Enforcement originally received reports of DAPL demonstrators carrying
weapons. This has been observed by both pilots and law enforcement on the
ground, both long guns and handguns. This became a reality on October 27th,
when a female protesters fired 3 rounds at close range at law enforcement.
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a
drone over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement.
This same operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet
AGL in an attempt to strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206
aircraft. Again, law enforcement got lucky and no one was injured. I personally
completed a report and filed felony charges in Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was
cleared to be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the
pilot and crew, some of which were law enforcement and they feared for their
life. Drones today have the technology for very stable flight and can withstand
rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft.
The pilot informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has
occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and
flown at a law enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of
activity occurs every chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to
persons on the ground and other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a
manner that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until
there is an actual incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is
injured, a TFR will not be in place. I was also informed the FAA stated since
there were no additional incidents, the TFR was taken down. The exact purpose
of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent operators from endangering
other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or even the absence of
further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering
armed individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not
only law enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to
ensure the movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not
being broadcast live by the use of drones. With today's technology this would be
very easy to do with a drone and the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and
On September 9th, I personally observed a drone operator intentionally operate a
drone over a crowd of unprotected people, both protesters and law enforcement.
This same operator on the same date purposely flew the drone above 400 feet
AGL in an attempt to strike the North Dakota Highway Patrol Cessna 206
aircraft. Again, law enforcement got lucky and no one was injured. I personally
completed a report and filed felony charges in Morton County.
On another date a drone operator flew his drone directly at a helicopter that was
cleared to be assisting law enforcement. This posed an immediate danger to the
pilot and crew, some of which were law enforcement and they feared for their
life. Drones today have the technology for very stable flight and can withstand
rotor wash from a helicopter.
Today another aircraft came within 300-400 yards of a law enforcement aircraft.
The pilot informed me has photos of this aircraft. This type of encounter has
occurred 3 other times.
At approximately 1330 today, a drone was operated in a reckless manner and
flown at a law enforcement crew then buzzed the operators. It seems this type of
activity occurs every chance the demonstrators have. This does pose a danger to
persons on the ground and other aircraft.
On a consistent basis, non-law enforcement drones are continually operated in a
manner that is putting people and aircraft in danger. The FAA has stated until
there is an actual incident where an aircraft is fired at and struck, or someone is
injured, a TFR will not be in place. I was also informed the FAA stated since
there were no additional incidents, the TFR was taken down. The exact purpose
of this TFR is prevent close call incidents and prevent operators from endangering
other aircraft and persons on the ground. The reduction or even the absence of
further incidents during the TFR only supports the need to keep a TFR in place.
Throughout the operation of this event, law enforcement are in fact encountering
armed individuals. The use of law enforcement air support is critical to keep not
only law enforcement safe, but innocent and peaceful demonstrators. We need to
ensure the movement of law enforcement trying to protect the innocent is not
being broadcast live by the use of drones. With today's technology this would be
very easy to do with a drone and the camera capabilities.
I can assure you the threat to aircraft and persons on the ground is very real and
on-going. I will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the
necessity of the TFR and answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed
by the unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue
will be raised why the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the
requesting agency. With the above incidents documented and the on-going close
calls and FAA regulations violations, it will be difficult to defend the decision to
not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will
be more than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims
and as to the reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft
and law enforcement. Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as
well as law enforcement officers trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
on-going. I will stand before an FAA agent or other persons questioning the
necessity of the TFR and answer those questions.
If an aircraft or crew, or even a person on the ground is injured or worse yet killed
by the unlawful operation of a drone or aircraft in this immediate area, the issue
will be raised why the previous TFR was taken down when not asked to by the
requesting agency. With the above incidents documented and the on-going close
calls and FAA regulations violations, it will be difficult to defend the decision to
not implement this requested TFR.
Sean, feel free to pass my number onto anyone involved in this process and I will
be more than willing to address all concerns as to the validity of the above claims
and as to the reasons why the TFR is critical to the safe operation of the aircraft
and law enforcement. Again, the TFR also protects the lawful demonstrators as
well as law enforcement officers trying to protect them.
Sgt. Shannon Henke
North Dakota Highway Patrol
601 Channel Drive
Bismarck, Nd 58501
(b) (6)
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
TFR Extension Request - State of ND
Monday, November 14, 2016 4:24:25 PM
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
Rob/Brian
On behalf of the State of ND, I wish to ask for an extension in time for the current TFR outlined in
FDC NOTAM 6/3362. We would request the TFR be extended 14 days from the current expiration
date in the NOTAM, or to 11/29/2016 at 2300hrs UTC. We desire no other changes be made to the
current TFR.
Sgt Shannon Henke of our ND Highway Patrol has outlined some specifics on why a TFR is still
warranted below. I’ll amplify and summarize the issues below:
· Violations of the TFR by UAS described below were in airspace well outside the block
established over the encampment for those staying there to operate their UAS systems. We
wanted to make that clear.
· The TFR has worked as intended to ensure the safety of all manned aircraft operators by
keeping non-participating aircraft clear of participating law enforcement aircraft, and more
important, reduce or eliminate the chances of a non-participating civilian pilot being lazed
or spotlighted. The area of the TFR is also of a size where no significant impacts have been
experienced by civilian aircraft or airports. I feel this reason in and of itself provides a very
solid foundation for extension – it has been proven to work
·
The TFR also has balanced 1st Amendment rights with aviation and responder safety,
especially with regard to UAS operations. It’s extension is necessary for the continued
safety and protection of lawful protestors, law enforcement, and the public. It also provides
the additional tools we all need for enforcement actions
We deeply appreciate the support you have given the state to help create a safer environment for
all in the area of the TFR, both on the ground and in the air. We respectfully ask for your continued
support in this regard. Should you need any further information or have questions, please feel free
to reach out to me at any time.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
TFR Extension Request - State of ND
Monday, November 14, 2016 4:24:25 PM
image004.png
image006.png
image008.png
Rob/Brian
On behalf of the State of ND, I wish to ask for an extension in time for the current TFR outlined in
FDC NOTAM 6/3362. We would request the TFR be extended 14 days from the current expiration
date in the NOTAM, or to 11/29/2016 at 2300hrs UTC. We desire no other changes be made to the
current TFR.
Sgt Shannon Henke of our ND Highway Patrol has outlined some specifics on why a TFR is still
warranted below. I’ll amplify and summarize the issues below:
· Violations of the TFR by UAS described below were in airspace well outside the block
established over the encampment for those staying there to operate their UAS systems. We
wanted to make that clear.
· The TFR has worked as intended to ensure the safety of all manned aircraft operators by
keeping non-participating aircraft clear of participating law enforcement aircraft, and more
important, reduce or eliminate the chances of a non-participating civilian pilot being lazed
or spotlighted. The area of the TFR is also of a size where no significant impacts have been
experienced by civilian aircraft or airports. I feel this reason in and of itself provides a very
solid foundation for extension – it has been proven to work
·
The TFR also has balanced 1st Amendment rights with aviation and responder safety,
especially with regard to UAS operations. It’s extension is necessary for the continued
safety and protection of lawful protestors, law enforcement, and the public. It also provides
the additional tools we all need for enforcement actions
We deeply appreciate the support you have given the state to help create a safer environment for
all in the area of the TFR, both on the ground and in the air. We respectfully ask for your continued
support in this regard. Should you need any further information or have questions, please feel free
to reach out to me at any time.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: TthQ, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 8:11:08 AM
Attachments: imageOOme
image003pm
MM
I had asked our guys to pull that together. Without having the eaches in front of me, I can tell you
they have remained active in the incident area. Setting that aside a moment, it has been very
helpful in keeping manned aircraft (participating and non-participating) safe as I mentioned
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
gt
?army
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:05 AM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Morning Sean. Do you have specific information about UASs violating the TFR or creating a
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: TthQ, Brian Sweetl Robert
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016 8:11:08 AM
Attachments: imageOOme
image003pm
MM
I had asked our guys to pull that together. Without having the eaches in front of me, I can tell you
they have remained active in the incident area. Setting that aside a moment, it has been very
helpful in keeping manned aircraft (participating and non-participating) safe as I mentioned
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
gt
?army
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: brian.throop@faa.gov
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:05 AM
To: Johnson, Sean robert.sweet@faa.gov
Subject: RE: TFR Extension
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Morning Sean. Do you have specific information about UASs violating the TFR or creating a
safety/security hazard? We are discussing an extension this morning and the more justification you
can provide the stronger our position will be. Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:16 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: TFR Extension
Rob/Brian-
We still see a need for a continuation of the TFR. UAS activity is still occurring, but non-
palticipating aircraft are out of the way of paiticipating ones (a good trend thanks to the TFR).
What do we need to do on our end to extend the TFR another 7-14 days?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell
safety/security hazard? We are discussing an extension this morning and the more justification you
can provide the stronger our position will be. Thanks! Brian
From: Johnson, Sean M.
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:16 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: TFR Extension
Rob/Brian-
We still see a need for a continuation of the TFR. UAS activity is still occurring, but non-
palticipating aircraft are out of the way of paiticipating ones (a good trend thanks to the TFR).
What do we need to do on our end to extend the TFR another 7-14 days?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Of?cer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:
Cell
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Reporting Potential TFR Violations
Tuesday, November 08, 2016 5:38:29 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Vance
Would it work if we gave you a summary every few days of potential violations of the TFR, unless
such violations result in a safety incident for an aircraft or we actually catch a violator?
We are having occurrences but the only facts we are able to provide is time. Since they are UAS, it
is difficult to even give a decent description past for e.g. quadcopter. Operator description is even
more challenging. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Emerson, Vance (FAA)
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Reporting Potential TFR Violations
Tuesday, November 08, 2016 5:38:29 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Vance
Would it work if we gave you a summary every few days of potential violations of the TFR, unless
such violations result in a safety incident for an aircraft or we actually catch a violator?
We are having occurrences but the only facts we are able to provide is time. Since they are UAS, it
is difficult to even give a decent description past for e.g. quadcopter. Operator description is even
more challenging. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: 701-328-8265
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
ND TFR Discussion
Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:03:46 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Good to talk to you both again today! I’m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I’ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA)
ND TFR Discussion
Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:03:46 PM
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Good to talk to you both again today! I’m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I’ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding. Thx
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: Thro_og, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
Date: Thursday, November 03, 2016 6:46:28 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOng
image003.gm
image004.gm
image007.gm
imageOOme
imageOllpm
As an FYI we still plan to submit for a TFR. We got a little sidetracked today with some other
response issues. I have a few eyes on the draft request now though.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:23 AM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
From: Johnson, Sean M.
To: SweetI Robert (FAA)
Cc: Thro_og, Brian (FAA)
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
Date: Thursday, November 03, 2016 6:46:28 PM
Attachments: imageOOlpm
imageOOng
image003.gm
image004.gm
image007.gm
imageOOme
imageOllpm
As an FYI we still plan to submit for a TFR. We got a little sidetracked today with some other
response issues. I have a few eyes on the draft request now though.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
?0rdo ab chao?
(Out of chaos, comes order)
?Incrementalism is the death of innovation - Nicholas Negroponte
From: robert.sweet@faa.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:23 AM
To: Johnson, Sean
Cc: brian.throop@faa.gov
Subject: RE: ND TFR Discussion
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Likewise. We miss our colleagues in Bismarck.
Re the justifications, as I noted, the Unified Command (UC) and lead Law Enforcement Agency (LEA)
needs to make a solid case for re-establishing the TFR, which was cancelled this past Tuesday. In
addition to address at least some (or all) of the three triggering threats outlined earlier, please
ensure that they explain what has changed between our Tuesday discussion with the UC, during
which they agreed that there was no furtherjustification for the TFR, and this morning. Citing
threats, which prompted us to originally put in the now cancelled TFR, will not be sufficient unless a
solid assertion is made that those threats have resurfaced and/or new threats have been
encountered. Beyond that, the argument would be buttressed if there is some backup from the
Federal LEAs on the ground-
Candidly, some of the involved tribes are arguing that the action to implement a TFR was
driven not by a genuine safety/security threat, but rather by the desire of the local LEAs handling
the situation to prevent the protestors from using drones to surveil unlawful actions on the part of
LE that infringe on the protestors? First Amendment rights. To be clear, we are steering well
clear of the First Amendment arguments, which are well outside of our AOR. Having said that, you
and our other colleagues in ND need to understand the substantial sensitivities surrounding the
FAA TFR action.
Best,
Rob
Ps hope you and yours, as well as Neal and his family are doing well.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mant-
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:01 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: ND TFR Discussion
Good to talk to you both again today! I?m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I?ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
This email is from an external source.
Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
Sean,
Likewise. We miss our colleagues in Bismarck.
Re the justifications, as I noted, the Unified Command (UC) and lead Law Enforcement Agency (LEA)
needs to make a solid case for re-establishing the TFR, which was cancelled this past Tuesday. In
addition to address at least some (or all) of the three triggering threats outlined earlier, please
ensure that they explain what has changed between our Tuesday discussion with the UC, during
which they agreed that there was no furtherjustification for the TFR, and this morning. Citing
threats, which prompted us to originally put in the now cancelled TFR, will not be sufficient unless a
solid assertion is made that those threats have resurfaced and/or new threats have been
encountered. Beyond that, the argument would be buttressed if there is some backup from the
Federal LEAs on the ground-
Candidly, some of the involved tribes are arguing that the action to implement a TFR was
driven not by a genuine safety/security threat, but rather by the desire of the local LEAs handling
the situation to prevent the protestors from using drones to surveil unlawful actions on the part of
LE that infringe on the protestors? First Amendment rights. To be clear, we are steering well
clear of the First Amendment arguments, which are well outside of our AOR. Having said that, you
and our other colleagues in ND need to understand the substantial sensitivities surrounding the
FAA TFR action.
Best,
Rob
Ps hope you and yours, as well as Neal and his family are doing well.
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mant-
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:01 PM
To: Sweet, Robert Throop, Brian (FAA)
Subject: ND TFR Discussion
Good to talk to you both again today! I?m working on securing the info needed to answer the three
points we discussed. In addition I?ll send along a map of the camp/USACE-approved free speech
area we discussed excluding.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
“Ordo ab chao”
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
Friday, November 04, 2016 7:31:55 PM
Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>
> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
>
> Sean,
>
> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>
> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
(b) (5)
TFR and more easily detect violators.
>
> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>
> best,
>
> Rob
>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
Friday, November 04, 2016 7:31:55 PM
Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>
> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
>
> Sean,
>
> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>
> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
(b) (5)
TFR and more easily detect violators.
>
> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>
> best,
>
> Rob
>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58:00 PM
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58:00 PM
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct:(b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
(b) (7)(E)
TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
(b) (7)(E)
TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Monday, November 07, 2016 12:10:15 PM
Thx!
FSDO reached out to us asking for reports of possible violations. We will be forwarding them on as they occur
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:07 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Sean,
At the current ops tempo, flight following is working. Bismarck approach says they are easily keeping track of the
participating aircraft.
Hope you are doing well,
R.
-----Original Message----@nd.gov]
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto(b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58 PM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Johnson, Sean M.
Sweet, Robert (FAA)
RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
Monday, November 07, 2016 12:10:15 PM
Thx!
FSDO reached out to us asking for reports of possible violations. We will be forwarding them on as they occur
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:07 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Sean,
At the current ops tempo, flight following is working. Bismarck approach says they are easily keeping track of the
participating aircraft.
Hope you are doing well,
R.
-----Original Message----@nd.gov]
From: Johnson, Sean M. [mailto(b) (6)
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:58 PM
To: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Subject: RE: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
RobCurrently they are/have been getting flight following, and it seems to be working for them. Will this work for you,
or do you want the info below for discreet codes still?
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sean M. Johnson
Plans Officer
ND Department of Emergency Services
Division of Homeland Security
Work: 701-328-8100
Direct: (b) (6)
Cell: (b) (6)
"Ordo ab chao"
(Out of chaos, comes order)
"Incrementalism is the death of innovation " - Nicholas Negroponte
-----Original Message----From: robert.sweet@faa.gov [mailto robert.sweet@faa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Johnson, Sean M. <(b) (6)
@nd.gov>
Cc: Gary.W.Miller@faa.gov; brian.throop@faa.gov; Michael.Hughes@faa.gov; Justin.Kinney@faa.gov
Subject: LE situation. DAPL protests - better id of participating aircraft
***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links. *****
Good morning, Sean,
Please let us know when you can id the tail numbers of the aircraft being regularly used by LE etc. over the DAPL
protest area. If you can also get aircraft type, operator, and poc (including tel) for each operator, that would also
help smooth things out. We can find this info via registry etc., but our effort to setup a good coordination...
Btw, are there any public aircraft flying in the area from ND Highway Patrol, ND NG, etc.? If so, please id those as
well.
Hope you are enjoying a smooth start to the day,
R.
-----Original Message----From: Sweet, Robert (FAA)
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 8:10 PM
To: Johnson, Sean M.
Cc: Miller, Gary W (FAA); Throop, Brian (FAA); Hughes, Michael (FAA)
Subject: Re: LE situation. DAPL protests - TFR
You are welcome, Sean.
Have a good evening,
R.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 19:31, Johnson, Sean M. (b) (6)
@nd.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank you all... will work the aircraft tail numbers issue and provide the info as soon as we can
>
> Sent from my iPhone... Therefore please excuse any fat finger or autocorrect errors.
>
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 18:29, "robert.sweet@faa.gov" <robert.sweet@faa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> ***** This email is from an external source. Please exercise caution when opening attachments and links.
*****
>>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Per our conversation, please find attached the NOTAM with which we published the TFR over the Cannonball
area.
>>
>> Please send us the tail numbers of the aircraft being used by LE when you can. As we discussed, our team
proposes (b) (5)
the TFR and more easily detect violators.
>>
>> As always, if you or our other colleagues at the UC or TOC have any questions or need anything else, we are
available to assist.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.doc>
>> <161104-15 Cannonball ND ZMP 6-3362.jpg>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone