I have a serious suggestion, Ross, and also a question as to why it has never been done before.
I would like to see an always-current list of the FSD's and the various AFSD's assigned to each US airport, coupled with their local contact information, i.e. snail mail, phone number to their office, and email address. I'd like to see this kept on the TSA web site and kept up to date at all times, preferably including the date that each person begins their tenure in that post.
I cannot imagine that this information is SSI, since TSA actually puts out an official press release each time a new FSD is appointed, giving that FSD's background as part of the release.
I believe that FSD's would be against such a list, as it would probably result in a deluge of complaints going directly to them rather than to Washington. This is certainly a distinct possibility. However, given that every airport has different needs and may have customized procedures, it seems only logical that when someone has a question, suggestion, or complaint, that they be able to contact someone locally, rather than being forced to go through Washington DC, where an issue might get a boilerplate email response that doesn't solve the problem, and then be marked "resolved" despite it not being resolved.
It's not terribly difficult. All we want is to be able to talk to someone in between the local c/p and John Pistole himself, if you take my meaning. It may require establishing a second, publicly-releasable email account for each FSD/AFSD so their day-to-day inbox isn't swamped, but that will also allow their office staff to assist them with handling such correspondence, just as the staff assists with phone and snail mail correspondence and in-person inquiries already.
But before any of that can happen, we need to know who exactly is at the helm at each airport. I don't believe it's right that I'd have to submit a FOIA request and possibly wait for weeks for this information, only to have it become obsolete every time an AFSD is promoted or an FSD is transferred or retires.
Originally Posted by
mikeef
My suggestion was a fourth sub-forum (TT, Practical, Checkpoint Debate, Ross) that would only be questions for Ross. Each question could be a thread. Repeat questions could be merged into the original and questions in the other sub-forums that have already been answered could be redirected to the Ross sub-forum. Those of us who have been around the WTMD a few times could help the newbies. That way, the three current forums could serve as discussion forum and the Ross sub-forum would be Q&A as well as a handy reference guide.
I am aware that this idea puts a lot of stress on the mods and Ross, but if it worked, it would be a fantastic source to get official answers quickly. And once people learned the system, I believe it would actually create less work for these two groups.
Mike
I'll second that motion.